What will be the future earth society?

[thelerner]

I share JoeBlasts sceptical view, too much Star Trek, not enough Animal Farm & 1984.

 

In the 1800's and 1900's there were a couple of Utopitarian towns built in my state. They all failed. Most communes fail. In Israel where they had various forms of communistic villages and farms called Kibbutz, some of which were even had raising the kids away from parents as a group, they've tended to do poorly. After a generation or two the kids left.

 

Idealists continually underestimated the hard work it takes to house, feed, and clothe society. So far in history the communistic model has tended to produce starvation and stagnation. I don't see how this plan is different or how those who run it don't become powerful Overlords who will try to dictate people lives from start to end. I think North Korea would applaud this plan and say (very truthfully)'We've achieved it'.

 

 

Before people sell there goods and give up there power, I think we'll need a generation or two of large scale success. There are still places with open land. Good luck.

 

 

Michael

[Sunya]

Like I said, reality. The technology is still in its childhood, is still relatively very expensive. Fusion can also power the world a thousand times over, but that isnt viable right now either. Funny when people think about "sustainability" they usually forget economic reality in that equation.

 

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/geothermal.html

 

"We've determined that heat mining can be economical in the short term, based on a global analysis of existing geothermal systems, an assessment of the total U.S. resource and continuing improvements in deep-drilling and reservoir stimulation technology," said panel head Jefferson W. Tester, the H. P. Meissner Professor of Chemical Engineering at MIT.

 

There's no need for fusion. Like I said, geothermal, wave, solar, and wind can power the world for thousands of years, and no the technology is not in its childhood. It's very viable. As for economic reality, it's very realistic. You've been fed propaganda by the oil companies who don't want this to happen. These technologies will be very cheap in the long run, and with technological innovation they will over time get more and more efficient, more and more sustainable requiring less and less maintenance and upkeep.

 

The sun is a fusion reactor and gives off a shitload of energy every single second. We just need to capture that energy. This year alone many breakthroughs in solar energy were accomplished.

 

If by "the scientific community" you are referring to quasi-scientist alarmist cheerleaders like Michael Mann and James Hansen, then yes, they are being quite dishonest to the point of blatant lies in some instances. If you're referring to other true scientists that simply want correctness (and not political correctness) to prevail, then no, there's a ton of them that have been questioning the crusade against CO2 for quite a while now because the models dont reflect reality to a sufficient degree of accuracy that they can be relied upon.

 

Science is never absolute and always changing due to new information, but there's certainly nothing wrong with cutting pollution in all forms and being more environmentally responsible.

 

I trust scientists way more than I trust politicians and businessmen

Edited December 29, 2010 by Sunya

[strawdog65]

Part 5

By: Jacque Fresco/ The Venus Project

 

MOTIVATION, INCENTIVE & CREATIVITY

It is claimed that the so-called free-enterprise system creates incentive. This may be true, but it also perpetuates greed, embezzlement, corruption, crime, stress, economic hardship, and insecurity. In addition, the argument that the monetary system and competition generate incentive does not always hold true. Most of our major developments in science and technology have been the result of the efforts of very few individuals working independently and often against great opposition. Such contributors as Goddard, Galileo, Darwin, Tesla, Edison, and Einstein were individuals who were genuinely concerned with solving problems and improving processes rather than with mere financial gain. Actually, very often there is much mistrust in those whose incentive is entirely motivated by monetary gain, this can be said for lawyers, businessmen, salesman and those in just about any field.

Some may question that if the basic necessities are accessible to all people, what will motivate them? This is tantamount to saying that children reared in affluent environments, in which their parents provide all the necessary food, clothing, shelter, nutrition, and extensive education, will demonstrate a lack of incentive or initiative. There is no evidence to support this fallacious assumption. There is overwhelming evidence to support the facts that malnutrition, lack of employment, low wages, poor health, lack of direction, lack of education, homelessness, little or no reinforcement for one's efforts, poor role models, poverty, and a bleak prospect for the future do create monumental individual and social problems, and significantly reduce an individual's drive to achieve. The aim of a resource based economy is to encourage and develop a new incentive system, one no longer directed toward the shallow and self-centered goals of wealth, property, and power. These new incentives would encourage people to pursue different goals, such as self-fulfillment and creativity, the elimination of scarcity, the protection of the environment, and the alleviation of suffering in their fellow human beings.

People, provided with good nutrition in a highly productive and humane society, will evolve a new incentive system unattainable in a monetary system. There would be such a wealth of new wonders to experience, explore, and invent that the notion of boredom and apathy would be absurd. Incentive is often squelched in our present culture, where a person dare not dream of a future that seems unattainable to him or her. The vision of the future that too many see today consists of endless days of mindless toil, and a wasted life, squandered for the sake of merely earning enough money to survive from one day to the next.

Each successive period in time creates it's own incentive system. In earlier times the incentive to hunt for food was generated by hunger; the incentive to create a javelin or a bow and arrow evolved as a process supportive to the hunt. With the advent of an agrarian society the motivation for hunting was no longer relevant, and incentives shifted toward the cultivation of crops, the domestication of animals, and toward the protection of personal property. In a civilization where people receive food, medical care, education, and housing, incentives would again undergo change and would be redirected: People would be free to explore other possibilities and lifestyles that could not be anticipated in earlier times.

The nature of incentive and motivation is dependent upon many factors. We know, for example, that the physical and mental health of an individual is directly related to that person's sense of self-worth and well-being. Furthermore, we know that all healthy babies are inquisitive; it is the culture that shapes the particular kind of inquiry and motivation. For example, in India and other areas of great scarcity there are many people who are motivated not to accumulate wealth and material property; they renounce all worldly goods. Under the conditions in which they find themselves, this is not difficult. This would seem to be in direct conflict with other cultures that value the accumulation of material wealth. Yet, which view is more valid? Your answer to this question would depend upon your frame of reference, that is, your culturally influenced value-system.

Many experimental psychologists and sociologist have shown that the effects of environment play a major role in shaping our behavior and values. If constructive behavior is appropriately rewarded during early childhood, the child becomes motivated to repeat the rewarded behavior, provided that the reinforcement meets the individual needs of the child. For example, if a football were given to a child who is interested in botany, this would not be a reward from the child's point of view. It is very unfortunate that so many individuals in our society today are not appropriately rewarded for their creative efforts. In some instances individuals are seemingly able to overcome the shortcomings of their environment in spite of an apparent lack of positive reinforcements. This is due to their own "self-reinforcement" in which they can see an improvement in whatever activity they are engaged in, and achieve an intrinsic sense of accomplishment; their reinforcement does not depend on the approval of others, nor on monetary reward. Those children who do depend on the approval of a group tend to be afflicted with a sense of low self-esteem, while children who do not depend on group approval usually acquire a sense of self-approval by improving upon their own performance.

Throughout history, there have been many innovators and inventors who have been ruthlessly exploited, ridiculed, and abused while receiving very little financial reward. Yet, they endured such hardship because they were motivated to learn and to discover new ways of doing things. While creative individuals like Leonardo de Vinci, Michelangelo, and Beethoven received the generous sponsorship of wealthy patrons, this did not diminish their incentive in the least. On the contrary, it empowered them to reach new heights of creativity, perseverance and individual accomplishments.

This is a difficult concept to grasp because most of us have been brought up with the value system that has given us a set of notions about the way that we ought to think and behave about money and motivation. These are based upon ancient ideas that are really irrelevant today.

It has been stated that war generates creativity. This deliberately falsified concept has no basis in fact. It is government financing of war industries that helped to develop many new materials and inventions. There is no question that a saner society would be able to create a more constructive incentive system if our knowledge of the conditions that shape human motivation were applied.

In this new social arrangement of a resource-based economy, motivation and incentive will be encouraged through recognition of, and concern for, the needs of the individual. This means providing the necessary environment, educational facilities, nutrition, health care, compassion, love, and security that all people need.

 

 

Comments? Thoughts?

[strawdog65]

Ideological to the point of poppycock.

 

The social programs devised in the 30s to "aid" us out of the depression merely caused the depression to be Great whereas the rest of the world merely experienced a recession.

 

Engines are fantastically more complex because people want them to perform and you dont get that development without more complexity.

 

"Planned obsolescence" is most often a lack of maintenance or a breakdown of materials used - we cant always engineer the perfect material that will last endlessly for any application.

 

Why are some farmers paid not to produce? Look up the myriad deleterious effects of oversubsidization.

 

Why is the average amount of unemployment so large? They keep freakin extending how long one can receive benefits.

 

Reality looks harshly upon dreamland all too often - this entire idea, while nice and compassionate, good hearted, is but a work of fantasy - sufficiently removed from reality so as to be all but completely unattainable. You're simply not going to get enough of a percentage of the population to go along with stuff like this no matter how good it would work in its own little microcosm of a lab setting, or the hallucinatory realms of the author's mind.

 

The buddha realms are called that for a reason

 

 

Hi joeblast!

 

Thanks for showing some interest.

I know it's hard to see something like what's being presented

as becoming a part of our reality, but when we reach a certain point

of world infrastructure falling apart and economies failing, what Idea would

you put forward as a means of creating a more sustainable future?

 

It is an easy path being a naysayer. It is easy to call ourselves realists,

and not face the facts that things will not change because it's what we

want, but because we will reach a point where we will have no other choice.

We do not presently live in a world wide fashion that is sustainable.

Profit based, scarcity based, greed based economics are the

perpetuators of the world wide discontent we see everyday.

 

I have thought about this subject for a large part of my life,

and I believe that the ideas being presented are a chance for

the world to make real changes for the better. I'd rather be accused

of being an optimist than always be looking for what is wrong with

a situation.

 

If you have a better idea then the ideas being presented,

please share them. You owe it to the world after all.

 

 

Peace!

[Sunya]

I share JoeBlasts sceptical view, too much Star Trek, not enough Animal Farm & 1984.

 

In the 1800's and 1900's there were a couple of Utopitarian towns built in my state. They all failed. Most communes fail. In Israel where they had various forms of communistic villages and farms called Kibbutz, some of which were even had raising the kids away from parents as a group, they've tended to do poorly. After a generation or two the kids left.

 

Idealists continually underestimated the hard work it takes to house, feed, and clothe society. So far in history the communistic model has tended to produce starvation and stagnation. I don't see how this plan is different or how those who run it don't become powerful Overlords who will try to dictate people lives from start to end. I think North Korea would applaud this plan and say (very truthfully)'We've achieved it'.

 

 

Before people sell there goods and give up there power, I think we'll need a generation or two of large scale success. There are still places with open land. Good luck.

 

 

Michael

 

This is not communist actually. This sort of system has never been tried before.

 

You have to face the facts. Without unions, all labor would have been automated by now. The technology exists, and it's only getting better. What will happen when that eventually happens? Millions will starve because there will be no work. Not everyone can become a doctor, lawyer, salesmen, etc. There will have to be radical changes.

 

The whole point made here is that the monetary system is based on a scarcity which doesn't have to exist, and technology can remove that need. Much labor can be replaced with technology, and this doesn't mean people will sit around being lazy all day. Modern psychological research shows that people just want to be useful and create. Most of the scientific and medical breakthroughs are done at research institutions by people who could care less about money.

 

This has nothing to do with spreading the wealth. The idea is that in the future wealth won't be necessary because everybody can have everything that they want in terms of resources. It's not about sharing possessions or living in a commune.

 

This site is very informative. http://www.thevenusproject.com/the-venus-project-introduction/faq

 

How does this differ from Communism?

While communism is a much more humane social system than what we have today, we feel it does differ considerably from the direction we advocate. While Marx offered a bold new direction in his time, it falls far short of what can be accomplished with today's technology applied with human and environmental concern.

 

The Venus Project offers science and technology in the service of humankind on a global scale and eventually helps to eliminate all the artificial boundaries that separate people. The system uses no money and makes goods and services available without a price tag, debt, barter, or servitude of any kind. If we use our technology intelligently, we can create an abundance of goods and services for the entire planet. We use machines and automation to produce and distribute all manufactured products, which will be available at distribution centers to everyone. The purpose of this high technology is to free people so they can pursue their own interests and fulfillments.

 

We would surpass the need for human participation in the production of goods and services. There is no taxation or obligation of any kind. We advocate no government by human systems. They have always proved inadequate. Computerized systems and cybernetics would be applied to the social system and must comply with the carrying capacity of our global resources. The machines' main purpose is for the manufacturing and distribution of goods and services while maintaining a clean environment with service to all and profits to none. When people have access to resources, most crimes will disappear. The need for police, military, and prisons will eventually vanish with it. Of course this will coincide with the necessary changes in education. I hope this helps to clarify some points. We realize this is a simplified description of how it differs from communism.

Edited December 29, 2010 by Sunya

[strawdog65]

This is not communist actually. This sort of system has never been tried before.

 

You have to face the facts. Without unions, all labor would have been automated by now. The technology exists, and it's only getting better. What will happen when that eventually happens? Millions will starve because there will be no work. Not everyone can become a doctor, lawyer, salesmen, etc. There will have to be radical changes.

 

The whole point made here is that the monetary system is based on a scarcity which doesn't have to exist, and technology can remove that need. Much labor can be replaced with technology, and this doesn't mean people will sit around being lazy all day. Modern psychological research shows that people just want to be useful and create. Most of the scientific and medical breakthroughs are done at research institutions by people who could care less about money.

 

This has nothing to do with spreading the wealth. The idea is that in the future wealth won't be necessary because everybody can have everything that they want in terms of resources. It's not about sharing possessions or living in a commune.

 

This site is very informative. http://www.thevenusproject.com/the-venus-project-introduction/faq

 

 

Hi Sunya!

 

You get it!

Why is it so hard for people to see that this is a new concept?

When we Let go of what our preconceptions are about what the

world and society is able to become, we arrive at new horizons

for our future.

 

I too was deeply affected by the Venus Projects website, it's

message and thought process for a future society is very deep

and makes more sense than anything else I have read concerning

future society and economy. More people need to see this and

open their minds to what is capable of happening.

 

Thanks for your comments!

I have told everyone I know about it!

 

Peace!

[Sunya]

Hi Sunya!

 

You get it!

Why is it so hard for people to see that this is a new concept?

When we Let go of what our preconceptions are about what the

world and society is able to become, we arrive at new horizons

for our future.

 

I too was deeply affected by the Venus Projects website, it's

message and thought process for a future society is very deep

and makes more sense than anything else I have read concerning

future society and economy. More people need to see this and

open their minds to what is capable of happening.

 

Thanks for your comments!

I have told everyone I know about it!

 

Peace!

 

Indeed! Of course a real possibility in the future is that instead of such a radical change, the powers at be will just take away more freedoms and retain an even stronger grip on people. I firmly agree with the Zeitgeist author that the internet must be protected at all costs.

 

I do agree with what somebody else said that there will have to be a huge disaster and people will have to lose faith in the political system and corporations. That's the only way. Otherwise, people are just too complacent and will sit around idly watching American Idol while their freedoms are taken away in the name of terror.

[strawdog65]

Indeed! Of course a real possibility in the future is that instead of such a radical change, the powers at be will just take away more freedoms and retain an even stronger grip on people. I firmly agree with the Zeitgeist author that the internet must be protected at all costs.

 

I do agree with what somebody else said that there will have to be a huge disaster and people will have to lose faith in the political system and corporations. That's the only way. Otherwise, people are just too complacent and will sit around idly watching American Idol while their freedoms are taken away in the name of terror.

 

 

Hi Sunya!

 

Yes I agree, Jacque Fresco said the same thing.

It will take a complete failure of the present

system before minds open to change.

 

 

Because people are so caught up in having all their

things and constantly accumulating more things, they

don't really care that they are just a different kind of

slave to the monetary system already in place.

 

People are so content to just sit on their complacent

asses and watch everything just fall to pieces as long

as they have their things to prove they have some worth.

 

At the current rate of wasting resources and not endeavoring to

do the science to make the new technology more usable quicker,

I would guess we will see some bad stuff within 20 years.

 

The hoarding of natural resources will become the fire starter

for many conflicts to come. If this is inevitable then it is good that

there will be a change from it.

 

Who really believes that they way governments and economies are

handled today is a sustainable future?

 

It was only controllable because of the separation of peoples

and the lack of technology. Now the population is barely manageable

and the resources necessary to feed clothe, and care for the world

population is controlled by the profit infrastructure.

 

There are enough resources to be shared.

The act of creating scarcity to keep a profit margin growing,

should be seen as the crime against Humanity that it really is.

 

Peace!

[strawdog65]

Part 7

By: Jacque Fresco/ The Venus Project

 

The Venus Project

The Venus Project is an organization that is founded on the ideas, designs, and direction presented here. It represents many years of research and dedication on the part of its originator and Project Director, Jacque Fresco. Its 25-acre research and design center is located in Venus, Florida where the future is taking shape today. The function of The Venus Project is to design, develop, and prepare plans for the construction of an experimental city based on the -principles outlined above. Here we have constructed nine experimental buildings, are developing alternative energy systems, city designs, transportation, manufacturing systems, and more. In support of this research we are creating blueprints, renderings, and models, holding seminars, producing books, videos, and other written material to introduce people to the aims of The Venus Project. The Venus Project is in the process of introducing a set of values and procedures that may enable us to achieve social transformation. The Venus Project will provide the designs and blueprints for a prototype community to test the validity of its social proposals and to establish a permanent planning center that could be used for future short-term and long-term project planning. It also proposes a relevant orientation for people to be able to adapt intellectually and emotionally to our new technological age. Anything short of overall social design would be inappropriate and far less effective. Our proposals will be submitted to the general public and all educational institutions, and we invite their participation. If enough people find the proposals acceptable and choose to join with us in this new advocacy, this could help to form the nucleus of an organization to further the aims of The Venus Project.

The circular configurations of the new cities as proposed by The Venus Project are not merely stylized architectural conceptualizations, but are the results of years of research to provide an environment that would best serve the needs of the occupants in an efficient and economical manner. Without sufficient knowledge of the symbiotic interrelationship between humanity and the environment, it would be extremely difficult to develop workable solutions to our many problems. In the planning of this new city The Venus Project has taken this and many other factors into careful consideration and study. This new experimental city would be devoted to working towards the aims and goals of The Venus Project, which are:

 

1. Conserving all the world's resources as the common heritage of all of the Earth's people.

 

2. Transcending all of the artificial boundaries that separate people.

 

3. Evolving from a monetary-based economy to a resource-based world economy.

 

4. Reclaiming and restoring the natural environment to the best of our ability.

 

5. Redesigning our cities, transportation systems, and agricultural and industrial plants so that

they are energy efficient, clean, and conveniently serve the needs of all people.

 

6. Evolving towards a cybernated society that can gradually outgrow the need for all political

local, national, and supra-national governments as a means of social management.

 

7. Sharing and applying all of the new technologies for the benefit of all nations.

 

8. Using clean, renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, geothermal, and tidal power, etc.

 

9. Ultimately utilizing the highest quality products for the benefit of all the world's people.

 

10. Requiring environmental impact studies prior to construction of any mega-projects.

 

11. Encouraging the widest range of creativity and incentive toward constructive endeavor.

 

12. Assisting in stabilizing the world's population through education and voluntary

birth-control to conform to the carrying capacity of the earth.

 

13. Outgrowing nationalism, bigotry and prejudice through education.

 

14. Eliminating any type of elitism, technical or otherwise.

 

15. Arriving at methodologies by careful research rather than random opinions.

 

16. Enhancing communication in the new schools so that our language and education is relevant to

the physical conditions of the world around us.

 

17. Providing not only the necessities of life but also offering challenges that stimulate the mind,

emphasizing individuality rather than uniformity.

 

18. Finally, preparing people intellectually and emotionally for the possible changes that lie ahead.

 

Like all other innovative social proposals, it starts out with a few devoted people that dedicate their time to informing others of the humane benefits of this new direction. People are invited to participate in whatever capacity they can to help carry out the initial design phases of this new experimental city. An interdisciplinary team of systems engineers, computer programmers, architects, city planners, sociologists, psychologists, educators and the like would also be needed. The design of The Venus Project does not regard environmental conditions as fixed or static. We must allow for adaptation and change within the system as a continuous process. This would avoid the tendency to perpetuate temporary arrangements beyond their period of usefulness.

The circular city proposed by The Venus Project would be a transitional phase and could evolve from a semi-cooperative money-oriented society to a full resource-based economy. This could be the prototype for a series of new cities to be constructed in various places throughout the world. The rate of progression will depend upon the availability of funds raised during the early stages and the people who identify, participate, and support the aims and direction of The Venus Project. As these new communities develop and become more widely accepted, they may very well form the basis of a new civilization, preferably through the process of evolution rather than revolution. We are well aware that no one can actually foretell the shape of the future. We can only extrapolate on present information and trends. Population growth, technological change, worldwide environmental conditions, and available resources are the primary criteria for future projections. We are also aware that there is no single philosophy or point of view -- religious, political, scientific, or ideological -- that someone would not take issue with. We feel certain, however, that the only aspects of The Venus Project that may appear threatening are those that others project into it.

The Venus Project is neither Utopian, nor Orwellian, nor does it reflect the dreams of impractical idealists. Instead, it presents attainable goals requiring only the intelligent application of what we already know. The only limitations are those we impose upon ourselves.

The Venus Project does not advocate dissolving the existing free-enterprise system. We believe it will eventually evolve towards a resource-based society of common heritage in due course. All that The Venus Project offers is an alternative approach for your consideration.

It is not possible in this short writing to present the precise methodology and operation of a global resource based economy. We encourage you to become better informed about the proposals of this project through our books, videos, lectures and seminars. If you identify with this direction, we welcome you to join with us and work towards its realization.

 

 

Comments?

 

Please take a moment to visit The Venus Project website.

 

It's our future, it's our world, it's up to us to make the change.

 

 

Peace!

[Sunya]

I'm surprised there aren't more bums interested in this or at least having a discussion about it.

[strawdog65]

Hello Everyone!

 

Isn't the shallowness of the view that we are whatever country we

are born into and what language we speak, and the color of our skin,

an obvious shortcoming of a mind that does not fully see the reality

of it's existence?

 

Can we not preserve our cultural gifts and still come to an agreement

that this is a shared world, and as such we are all part of it, equally?

 

What is the next step in the natural progression of a world society

if not a one world government?

 

Can anyone honestly say that they continue to see the present form of

government succeeding in the future?

I think that we are obligated to change how we perceive this

world and the thinking of the people populating it, and realize that we

must eventually reconcile our desire for separation with the actuality

of us all being connected to each other, and needing each other.

 

If the thought process of identifying with a country, or a belief system could be

altered to identifying with our entire world, would we not see people differently?

Imagine no countries, imagine one world, with one people that understand

and grasp that they are brothers and sisters only separated by

the thoughts they believe to be true, which are not.

 

As long as people of all countries, ethnicities, and belief systems focus on

what our differences are, we will never know peace. It will take the shift in

consciousness that we are a one world community, with billions of individuals

making up the whole, and that we are all children of planet earth.

 

When population reaches the point of resources not being able to support

the people of the world, that's when there will be change. There are resources

available to be shared. The issue with sharing resources is that there is no profit to

be made in helping others unless they can pay. So resources, food, oil, technology,

sit and are not used unless someone is making a profit. This type of world economy

will become unworkable in the near future.

 

A profit based economy is a symptomatic of the lack of regard for life and

stewardship we have for our planet. It will lead to more war and ultimately

planetary destruction.

The way out is for us to change.

Technology will be the key to this change, machines will eventually remove

man from the work place, it is inevitable. Once machines take over the work

place what next? This isn't as far fetched as you may think, the progression has been

and will continue to be work that has been done by mankind, will continue to taken

up by machines and computers. Man will become obsolete as a physical means of

getting things done. This is when it gets interesting.

 

Repurposing mankind: what will we do with all the people?

People will need purpose. How about them working for the good and betterment

of the world we share? When you eliminate working for profit, you enable people

to share their gifts for what they are good at, freely.

 

One world, One people, One future together.

 

Peace!

[strawdog65]

I'm surprised there aren't more bums interested in this or at least having a discussion about it.

 

 

Hi Sunya!

 

I know what you mean!

I feel like I'm having to fan this small little flame so that

it will be noticed before it goes out!

 

The incredible concepts that are the Venus Project are really

mind changing. I always thought to myself, isn't there a better

way to live and have a society then what we have now?

I always thought about it, but the concept of an economy based

on world resources and NO money system just blows me away!

 

There was a comment made about someone watching too

much Star Trek, in regards to this idea, and I have to say,

if the Star Trek comment was meant to be a slight... it's

not! What's wrong with a Star Trek form of government?

 

I don't think people realize the ground breaking nature

of what a world based on the ideas being presented, would

be like.

 

It is very exciting to think that the human race is able

to become something more than materialistic and greedy.

That we have the seed of great societal change looking

us in the face, and all we have to do is be receptive to it.

 

I will keep trying to bring some awareness of this

to TTB and hope for the best!

 

At the very least I have reached one person ...

You Sunya, and together we can spread what we

know. Sometimes things take time.

 

Peace!

[joeblast]

SD...the rosy picture of the end result is great and all, but it smacks of the underpants gnomes business model to me:

 

Phase 1: Collect Underpants

Phase 2: ?

Phase 3: Profit

 

There's a huge disconnect between reality and implementation, and to fantasize about it getting done on a worldwide scale is somewhat delusional. I agree with theLerner about the commune thing, the Pilgrims tried that too and it failed miserably! The end result here, unless kids were ostensibly indoctrinated very thoroughly, would be that this society would most like produce a ton of lazy teenagers that would make our current crop look like Carnegies.

 

My philosophy rests more on individual responsibility. I'm all for helping others out, but when "help" is institutionalized, those helped merely become accustomed to the help and rely heavily upon it. Teach a man to fish for godssakes! It is like a monk making the alms rounds every day - done in a proper manner by the monk he will not visit the same houses every day, because he is truly looking for the little "extra" above and beyond what the family ate that day and doesnt want the family to purposefully cook extra every day because they know the monk will show up!

 

"That which is owned by the most people will have correspondingly the least care taken of it." Time tested history.

 

And...the "star trek" government...well, nobody ever really knew much detail on the Federation's government. All we knew was that they had cheap, plentiful, abundant energy to the point that they could manipulate matter, ending hunger, could even jaunt around the stars it was so plentiful, usable. See #2 in the gnome strategy for how to get there from here! It seems we could devise a similar map to make this place a buddha realm It would be just a little harder

 

 

Sunya, I dont need to hear "the oil companies told you blahblahblah" - economic reality isnt dictated by the oil companies, there is a worldwide market for everything - and if geothermal were that cheap, more people would be using it (my buddy's dad just built a house and investigated it - made his house such that the technology could be utilized at some point in the future, but "economic reality" dictated that it was far too expensive to bother with right now, there were far more cheaper options to utilize that would extract more heat out of the process...lose/lose for geothermal); wind is peaky and all too often is using traditional offsets; I havent seen much on the wave harnessing; and while solar has been making good gains it would still need massive oversubsidization like germany did to even start to have a dent on the US grid - its a good idea, but again, economic reality - you're going to have to take a shitload of money from somewhere else in order to sufficiently subsidize more solar usage here in the US. Its either that or the prices naturally come down as technology improves - which is a better model for the most part since real value is reflected more accurately at far more datapoints plotted.

 

My point isnt that I'm somehow against other forms of energy - its more than I'm for using the same measuring stick to grade them all. Its like these stupid electric cars, yeah, let's produce the energy somewhere else, not take into account any of the transmission losses when calculating how efficient the thing is...I digress. Oversubsidization distorts the measuring stick and when the subsidies are pulled back people then dont want to pay what the real price should be for it! How expensive would the Volt be without all the subidies? Its already over 40 grand for one! (not the best example, thanks to all the extra union costs - speaking of unions, my buddy's dad had a good point on them as well: "They tend to do a great job at representing their worker's best interests...until they get big enough that they start worrying about their own interests first." They served their purpose long ago, but the AFL-CIOs, SEIUs of today are downright cancerous entities.)

 

That said, there absolutely is a need for fusion. That is one of the marked milestones of a civilization's advancement, imho. Funny its the ultimate in clean energy, but we dont need to bother with that???

 

 

Science is always changing...indeed it is. And no amount of pasting together dissimilar datasets will get around CO2's absorption band being nearly saturated, no amount of CO2 reduction (e.g. economic de-development) here is going to change what the sun is doing. I'm all for eliminating pollution - and I'm all for calling a spade a spade - the CO2 propaganda is a bunch of crap

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

I'm surprised there aren't more bums interested in this or at least having a discussion about it.

 

 

I'm not. Some bums are pre-occupied with gaining cool superpowers and siddhis, or getting "enlightened" and don't really care much for the collective good.

[manitou]

it just doesn't seem like there's any other way. the profit motive has skewed us all out of balance.

 

I love the idea of communal living for the good of all. Some of us are no good at competing in the profit motive arena at all. People will often say something like "But the opportunities are open for everyone!", in justifying the capitalist system we suffer under. But in reality not everyone is given the same talents. Some of us are skilled in other areas - music, literature, art - but just don't have the 'going for the kill' instinct to make any kind of money. It's not our focus. The money-energy gets stuck in the hands of those that have that particular instinct.

 

With the internet being the great equalizer of all time, things are going to evolve as they should, I'm thinking. The individual minds of men meet in the collective on the internet. We are talking soul to soul. Some of us are in Europe, some in America, some in China, we are everywhere. We no longer need to stand behind our humanly-foibled leaders for national dialogue. We can have it right here, right now, on the internet.

 

Perhaps barter will become a greater part of the new world economy, once the world has determined what it wants it to be.

 

For some reason this discussion reminds me that as we journey inward into our own psyches, the journey seems to take us back to our beginnings. The mind ceases being so judgmental and becomes more childlike, more full of wonder and less of opinion and judgment. I imagine the ancient ones saw the tribe, the commune, as their reality. I'm thinking it was more about the group and less about the individual. I suspect that they huddled together for healings, sharing the Oneness that perhaps they were able to actually See manifesting around them.

 

So perhaps modern man is going to have to return to the tribal, in a sense, where everyone is provided for. It certainly seams like a nice and balanced wrap-up from one type of living model to another. It resonates for me.

[strawdog65]

Kay Sa rah Sa rah, whatever will be, will be.....

 

 

 

I am suprised by the apathy with which these ideas are

being met. Are you all so comfortable inside your little bubbles

of existence that you just don't care about anything else?

 

I am totally with the idea of "living life now" and being in the moment.

It is how I go thru my everyday, not focusing on anything but

what is right here before me, and accomplishing what needs to be

done because it is whats needed right at that moment.

I know many of you will say whatever will be will be, just like the

song quoted above, by Doris Day. But do you really feel such apathy

for what the future holds and what direction it takes?

 

The post about Wiki Leaks seems to be a one with a lot of people

interested in holding people accountable, and getting to the bottom

of conspiracies behind that mess.

 

Do you all not see that we as a world, are constantly being manipulated by

our societies and governments?

There is no longer any country that has true independence. We are all very

reliant our other countries to supply us with the things that we so desperately

need to buy to keep up with the jones's.

 

We have become materialistic Pigs, all feeding at the very same trough,

all worshiping the very same principles of greed and scarcity that keep

us in the bonds of slavery that we insist is not true.

 

No one living within any society anywhere in this world is truly "free".

The very act of living within something dictates the very limitations of our

bondage. Only those who have left this material plane of existence are free

from it.

 

So face up to the fact that You and I and everyone else we know on this planet, is not free.

Because we are not free, and will never be free we should try and do

what we can to make changes to improve existence for everyone.

The Venus project is more than just "pie in the sky" if you really grasp what is being said.

 

We live within a system that manufactures scarcity to inflate prices

and create profit for the ones controlling our society.

 

Is it not obvious that as the world population explodes, we will reach a point where

the excesses / luxury of the wealthy, mean by necessity death to the poor?

 

A scarcity based world economy, cares not for people living or dying.

It's only care is one of manipulating the price/value of said product to create wealth

for the proprietor of said product. This manipulation is accomplished thru, production

and non-production. Just like OPEC does controlling the amount of oil that is produced

so as to keep the prices inflated to continue the profits for those that are part of OPEC.

So too is this true of manufactures and suppliers of food and resources world-wide.

 

If there is no profit to be made then why produce anything at all?

Cut back production, create scarcity, drive up prices and then slowly produce to the now

inflated demand. A vicious, callous cycle that is demeaning to the value of human life and

suffering.

 

It is a crime against humanity when starvation, and suffering is permitted

to continue in the name of profit.

[strawdog65]

SD...the rosy picture of the end result is great and all, but it smacks of the underpants gnomes business model to me:

 

Phase 1: Collect Underpants

Phase 2: ?

Phase 3: Profit

 

There's a huge disconnect between reality and implementation, and to fantasize about it getting done on a worldwide scale is somewhat delusional. I agree with theLerner about the commune thing, the Pilgrims tried that too and it failed miserably! The end result here, unless kids were ostensibly indoctrinated very thoroughly, would be that this society would most like produce a ton of lazy teenagers that would make our current crop look like Carnegies.

 

My philosophy rests more on individual responsibility. I'm all for helping others out, but when "help" is institutionalized, those helped merely become accustomed to the help and rely heavily upon it. Teach a man to fish for godssakes! It is like a monk making the alms rounds every day - done in a proper manner by the monk he will not visit the same houses every day, because he is truly looking for the little "extra" above and beyond what the family ate that day and doesnt want the family to purposefully cook extra every day because they know the monk will show up!

 

"That which is owned by the most people will have correspondingly the least care taken of it." Time tested history.

 

And...the "star trek" government...well, nobody ever really knew much detail on the Federation's government. All we knew was that they had cheap, plentiful, abundant energy to the point that they could manipulate matter, ending hunger, could even jaunt around the stars it was so plentiful, usable. See #2 in the gnome strategy for how to get there from here! It seems we could devise a similar map to make this place a buddha realm It would be just a little harder

 

 

Sunya, I dont need to hear "the oil companies told you blahblahblah" - economic reality isnt dictated by the oil companies, there is a worldwide market for everything - and if geothermal were that cheap, more people would be using it (my buddy's dad just built a house and investigated it - made his house such that the technology could be utilized at some point in the future, but "economic reality" dictated that it was far too expensive to bother with right now, there were far more cheaper options to utilize that would extract more heat out of the process...lose/lose for geothermal); wind is peaky and all too often is using traditional offsets; I havent seen much on the wave harnessing; and while solar has been making good gains it would still need massive oversubsidization like germany did to even start to have a dent on the US grid - its a good idea, but again, economic reality - you're going to have to take a shitload of money from somewhere else in order to sufficiently subsidize more solar usage here in the US. Its either that or the prices naturally come down as technology improves - which is a better model for the most part since real value is reflected more accurately at far more datapoints plotted.

 

My point isnt that I'm somehow against other forms of energy - its more than I'm for using the same measuring stick to grade them all. Its like these stupid electric cars, yeah, let's produce the energy somewhere else, not take into account any of the transmission losses when calculating how efficient the thing is...I digress. Oversubsidization distorts the measuring stick and when the subsidies are pulled back people then dont want to pay what the real price should be for it! How expensive would the Volt be without all the subidies? Its already over 40 grand for one! (not the best example, thanks to all the extra union costs - speaking of unions, my buddy's dad had a good point on them as well: "They tend to do a great job at representing their worker's best interests...until they get big enough that they start worrying about their own interests first." They served their purpose long ago, but the AFL-CIOs, SEIUs of today are downright cancerous entities.)

 

That said, there absolutely is a need for fusion. That is one of the marked milestones of a civilization's advancement, imho. Funny its the ultimate in clean energy, but we dont need to bother with that???

 

 

Science is always changing...indeed it is. And no amount of pasting together dissimilar datasets will get around CO2's absorption band being nearly saturated, no amount of CO2 reduction (e.g. economic de-development) here is going to change what the sun is doing. I'm all for eliminating pollution - and I'm all for calling a spade a spade - the CO2 propaganda is a bunch of crap

 

 

Hi Joeblast!

 

Thanks for showing more interest!

 

I appreciate all you've said and they are all very valid concerns and do error on the

side of not taking any risks, but you are missing a vital element of what is being proposed.

 

This would be a society without a profit based, greed based, monetary system of any kind.

 

By world cooperation and understood consensus, all humans would have the innate right

to food, shelter, education, there would be no askance of anything other than our contribution

to the society by means of whatever our aptitude and abilities we possess.

 

By todays society and monetary system... this is not only unheard of, it is quite literally

incomprehensible to many people, because it is so far outside of what they have lived their

lives within all their lives long.

 

I do not believe this is going to happen of it's own accord. I do believe it will be something

that happens after war and suffering on a world-wide scale, and it will be something that is

our last chance before the descent into chaos and a loss of the technology we now possess.

 

For a society to not do something because of "price" is ridiculous.

 

Money is a manufactured part of our myopic society, it only has value because

we agree to it. Services, food, skilled workers, people of innate and learned ability,

these are of true value. When a society sees that existence is not something that should

ever be denied because there is no profit in it, thats when society will understand

that the value of life is beyond any manufactured price.

 

To remove desire and greed, we must have compassion to take care of everyone

because we can, not because there is profit to be made.

 

Peace!

[Sunya]

Sunya, I dont need to hear "the oil companies told you blahblahblah" - economic reality isnt dictated by the oil companies, there is a worldwide market for everything - and if geothermal were that cheap, more people would be using it (my buddy's dad just built a house and investigated it - made his house such that the technology could be utilized at some point in the future, but "economic reality" dictated that it was far too expensive to bother with right now, there were far more cheaper options to utilize that would extract more heat out of the process...lose/lose for geothermal); wind is peaky and all too often is using traditional offsets; I havent seen much on the wave harnessing; and while solar has been making good gains it would still need massive oversubsidization like germany did to even start to have a dent on the US grid - its a good idea, but again, economic reality - you're going to have to take a shitload of money from somewhere else in order to sufficiently subsidize more solar usage here in the US. Its either that or the prices naturally come down as technology improves - which is a better model for the most part since real value is reflected more accurately at far more datapoints plotted.

 

My point isnt that I'm somehow against other forms of energy - its more than I'm for using the same measuring stick to grade them all. Its like these stupid electric cars, yeah, let's produce the energy somewhere else, not take into account any of the transmission losses when calculating how efficient the thing is...I digress. Oversubsidization distorts the measuring stick and when the subsidies are pulled back people then dont want to pay what the real price should be for it! How expensive would the Volt be without all the subidies?

 

You believe in a global market? There is no free market, and my cousin who is a staunch Austrian school libertarian constantly reminds me of that. The electrical car could've been a cheap reality a long time ago, except the technology was constantly killed by oil companies. Look intoWho Killed The Electric Car and how corporations and government blocked technological innovation.

 

The energy to power the electric car is also a reality. The material to make solar panels is very cheap, contrary to popular belief, and can be made very efficient. Fusion can join in on the fun too. In the game of supply and demand, even if the supply is there for clean, efficient, and sustainable energy (which there can be), demand won't be there and thus the technology won't come to fruition. Now in capitalism, the idea is that demand dictates the market, but demand isn't this divine attribute that correctly guides human progress. The principle of demand relies on free access to information which we do not have. Oil companies (and I really just use them as an example, they aren't the only corporations out there) will advertise against and create propaganda (and even bribe governments) against the use of more efficient alternative cheaper energy because they will lose profit. So, the demand won't be there even though this technology can be very good for humanity, much better than what we use currently.

Edited December 30, 2010 by Sunya

[joeblast]

hmm...and how are you going to convince the world to simply be all it can be with no incentive for anything other than a supreme sense of altruism, love, and good will for the fellow man? Certainly altruism's a good part of any good man's repertoire, but at the same time the view is a little narrow in scope, there are too many other factors that would need to be ignored for the idea to have a measure of viability.

 

Money exists because it was easier than bartering everything. You arent going to eliminate greed anymore than you're going to eliminate lust. The whole deal is part of what makes being human challenging - it provides tremendous potential, but potential that must be cultivated, and not solely by a "choice subset of positives" - as Rilke wrote, "the protected heart, that is never exposed to loss, innocent and secure, cannot know true tenderness; only the won-back heart can ever be satisfied: free, through all it has given up, to rejoice in its mastery." The bush exposed to the elements grows more formidably.

 

And speaking of rights,

 

 

Food, shelter, education are not rights. Although life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are.

[strawdog65]

 

 

Food, shelter, education are not rights. Although life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are.

 

The "rights" of a society are determined by the actions of a society.

 

The rights you have listed make a nice bumper sticker.

Because they are considered to be of irrefutable importance they are

considered rights.

 

 

All Human beings have a right to live and not starve, especially when

there are food stores going bad because there is no profit to be made.

 

All Human beings have a right to shelter from the elements,

and with such, a restored respect for the human condition.

 

All Human beings have a right to be educated so that they

can contribute to their society, and live meaningful lives.

 

How can anyone honestly say that an education is not an

obvious innate right to any Human being?

 

This "rights" thing is a perfect example of the type of

thinking that separates people all over the world.

How can anyone of conscience elevate some people

with education while turning a blind eye to the rest?

 

We as a society dictate what is a right and not.

 

Obviously we are not doing our best to elevate everyone to a

standard where they are able to make the best contribution

they can to society, and in fact we are actively holding people

back by not seeing this.

 

Joeblast, you can't honestly believe that human beings have no

innate rights to live and be alive and be educated and contribute

to society? Can you?

 

Do you not see the shortsightedness of this attitude?

 

How many future Einstein's need to starve and die young

and uneducated because of the attitude that an education is

not an innate right to all?

 

Do you not see it?

[thelerner]

Its a great feel good Ideal but the Who had it right,

 

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution

Take a bow for the new revolution

Smile and grin at the change all around me

Pick up my guitar and play

Just like yesterday

Then I'll get on my knees and pray

We don't get fooled again

Don't get fooled again

 

Meet the new boss

Same as the old boss

 

It dances around who has the power. Giving it to 'Cybernetics' who'll 'fairly' distribute the goods as they/it sees fit.

 

I'd welcome and applaud anyone who had the guts to create a commune or city based on these ideals. One where people weren't forced into it. We could see if an MIT's professor's thesis translates into real power or stays on paper. There may be a reason why he's not an engineer. Whether resources were used wisely or squandered. If people had freedom or were forced into being 'good comrades'.

 

Show me it working. I haven't checked on it lately but Trunk had some good posts and sites on Communal based living and hyper farming. That kind of thing works best when its purely volunteer. Seems like Venus wants to take over the world first, solve problems later.

 

 

 

Michael

 

 

 

Yo Sdog you seem to be dancing around with soft ball sophistry like: "Joeblast, you can't honestly believe that human beings have no innate rights to live and be alive and be educated and contribute

to society? Can you?"

 

Uh, I think Joe (and 99% of all people) would say people have the right to live, shocking!!!, they have the right to contribute to society ?? Thats a deep question, NOT.

 

Education, at least there is some meat to that one. So does Venus say we should all get an elementary education or highschool or Masters degrees. If people could stay in school (avoid real work) til they're 32 and have free master degrees thats wonderful, not practical, but wonderful.

 

In the here and now, what are you actually doing to see someone in say an African village is getting an education?? Anything??.

 

Here's what I'm doing. Every month some family somewhere gets a flock of chickens thanks to thelerners. Its not a lot, its not an education, but its food, fertilizer, pest control, a renewable sellable resource. IF well cared for it will grow, slowly, but possibly exponentially.

 

Slow, but real. Versus the Venus Plan of give us Everything and the Cybernetics will treat you kindly.

 

 

Michael

[Gerard]

I just forgot to mention this in my only post on this thread:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_Garbage_Patch

 

Gaia has reached its limit and something needs to happen and will happen as I mentioned before. Life on Earth will be difficult to sustain in the future for a large majority from a healthy and spiritual perspective. The ones in power disagree but have no idea about the principle of interconnectedness. That what affects the one will affect the whole.

 

I watched last night a TV show on SBS Australia called the "Food Additives An Edible Adventure." Humans firmly believe that adding "E" substances to the food is healthy.

 

 

Edited: typo.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Gerard

[strawdog65]

Its a great feel good Ideal but the Who had it right,

 

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution

Take a bow for the new revolution

Smile and grin at the change all around me

Pick up my guitar and play

Just like yesterday

Then I'll get on my knees and pray

We don't get fooled again

Don't get fooled again

 

Meet the new boss

Same as the old boss

 

It dances around who has the power. Giving it to 'Cybernetics' who'll 'fairly' distribute the goods as they/it sees fit.

 

I'd welcome and applaud anyone who had the guts to create a commune or city based on these ideals. One where people weren't forced into it. We could see if an MIT's professor's thesis translates into real power or stays on paper. There may be a reason why he's not an engineer. Whether resources were used wisely or squandered. If people had freedom or were forced into being 'good comrades'.

 

Show me it working. I haven't checked on it lately but Trunk had some good posts and sites on Communal based living and hyper farming. That kind of thing works best when its purely volunteer. Seems like Venus wants to take over the world first, solve problems later.

 

 

 

Michael

 

 

 

Yo Sdog you seem to be dancing around with soft ball sophistry like: "Joeblast, you can't honestly believe that human beings have no innate rights to live and be alive and be educated and contribute

to society? Can you?"

 

Uh, I think Joe (and 99% of all people) would say people have the right to live, shocking!!!, they have the right to contribute to society ?? Thats a deep question, NOT.

 

Education, at least there is some meat to that one. So does Venus say we should all get an elementary education or highschool or Masters degrees. If people could stay in school (avoid real work) til they're 32 and have free master degrees thats wonderful, not practical, but wonderful.

 

In the here and now, what are you actually doing to see someone in say an African village is getting an education?? Anything??.

 

Here's what I'm doing. Every month some family somewhere gets a flock of chickens thanks to thelerners. Its not a lot, its not an education, but its food, fertilizer, pest control, a renewable sellable resource. IF well cared for it will grow, slowly, but possibly exponentially.

 

Slow, but real. Versus the Venus Plan of give us Everything and the Cybernetics will treat you kindly.

 

 

Michael

 

Hey Michael!

Thanks for showing more interest and asking questions.

 

I think it's great that you are doing something real and measurable to help

people in Africa. That is a positive, useful contribution. I can not claim to be

doing anything like that at all.

Actually I am doing nothing like you.

I am just a humble, average man taking a stand on a subject that I honestly

believe in, and would like to have others find out what got me so excited about it.

 

I choose to be optimistic with what has been presented, because I see that it is

an easy path to take being negative and rationalizing negativity with being a "realist"..

 

No I have not done anything like you, but then I'm also not interested in proving

that I am having to do anything other then what comes natural to me as the person I am.

I also have no need to say... look at me, look and see what I have done.

 

I just endeavor to treat the people in my life equally well, regardless of

their differences from myself, on a daily basis. My practice is not as measurable

as what you have taken on, but it is none the less very challenging.

 

I do think you are missing the important points I was attempting to make with

my comments about rights. Adhering to a view because it is within your

experience and not being open to a new view is very shortsighted.

 

Rights are what we decide they should be, there are no rules other than that.

 

If we as a future society decide that an education is a right of all people word-wide,

where is the issue?

Isn't a lack of an education a major contributing factor in people resorting to a life of crime?

Wouldn't more education help? Isn't a better educated society beneficial to everyone?

I fail to see the negative in what I'm saying.

 

As far as the right to live comment, Was that an attempt at sarcasm?

 

When we make comments like saying that food and shelter are not rights,

this shows an ignorance of why they should be rights to everyone.

 

It is the basic necessities of life, like food, shelter, and education, that

shape the society. When these are denied to people they are justifiably

malcontent.

A more Humanistic society would naturally see that these are innate

rights to all Human beings Because they determine how the people within the

society are able to contribute to that society. If something is beneficial then

what is the downside of what is being said? An educated society is better suited to

take care of their world, and see the "realism" in cooperation for the greater good.

 

Our world, our society, our leaders, have it all wrong.

 

Many of the issues within society are rooted in the differences

between the people who "have" and the people who "have not".

Education is a big part of this problem. Education should be available at no cost

to everyone. The hoarding of education and knowledge in general helps to

hinder the real advancement of people world-wide.

 

We are all stuck on the monetary system idea!

Money is a creation. It is not the only workable economic model.

It is a hard concept to get your mind around, I am still trying to fully comprehend it.

 

As Taoists, is part of our Human nature to be selfish and not care for others?

As Taoists, is not the benefit to the world also a benefit to ourselves?

As Taoists, what care should we have about costs and money?

 

I ask because I see a lot of concern for the "reality" of what is being proposed,

but I see very little of the Sage mentality in being selfish and callous.

As Taoists is disdain and incredulity for new ideas common?

I am not understanding the animosity.

 

You ask about who has the power?

 

Let me ask you... if this is a concern to you Michael, who has the power right now?

Can you honestly say?

 

I doubt that anyone of us know , or could tell any of us who actually has the

power that controls world events. Is this even actually knowable?

 

The hands of power are never seen, only the puppets are seen, by us the ignorant observers.

 

It does not really matter, because we are talking about a hypothetical future

society, and to talk about it now as though we can sort this mess out without

taking into consideration what will be happening at that future time is an

exercise in futility. The power will be in the hands of whomever the governing

body decides it should be, which would be decided based upon what was transpiring

at that future point in time. (see what I mean? sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? talking about

something before it is possible because it's a future event.)

 

It seems that the idea of people being free to learn and contribute based on their individual

attributes is somehow irritating to your personal philosophy.

Why is this? Could you please explain your point of view?

 

Michael, did you actually take the time to read the essay and go to the Venus Project site?

I am having difficulty with the animosity I am perceiving from the words you wrote.

What reason is there for animosity and distrust of Ideas being presented by a man who is

now going to be 93 years old? Jacque Fresco's ideas are incredibly inspirational, this man

has no concerns for power or our money. I think a better look at the website, with a more

open mind would help to elucidate some of these feelings of undeserved animosity.

 

You are entitled to your own opinion of anything at all.

But, perpetuating negativity is not advisable as a source of inspiration.

[Sunya]

It dances around who has the power. Giving it to 'Cybernetics' who'll 'fairly' distribute the goods as they/it sees fit.

 

If there is an overabundance of goods, there is no need to distribute. There can be distribution centers and whoever wants a particular good can come get them. Computers can predict demand and create accordingly.

 

What power? What is the purpose of power? Power is about control. Nobody is being controlled in the proposed society. You can actually do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt others. The idea is that with proper education, most people will grow up to be citizens who will desire to contribute and making positive progressive changes.

 

The key element is taking the focus away from the individual and onto the greater reality, that we are all interconnected and part of the same system. People should be raised with this basic truth. It's not merely a philosophy. If children were taught this and shown this experientially, guided to realize this for themselves, then it would help dictate their behavior.

[Sunya]

Money exists because it was easier than bartering everything. You arent going to eliminate greed anymore than you're going to eliminate lust.

 

Greed exists because the organism is grown up with the idea of separation and that its survival can be threatened if it doesn't have the means to survive (money). You seem to have ideas about human nature which you think are actually factual. Modern psychology shows that we are products of society and our environment, and though people have genetic dispositions, these dispositions only come out if the environment brings them out. For example, there is a gene identified with depression in most Americans who have depression. I believe 6 or 7 out of 10 Amish men have this gene, yet Amish people rarely get diagnosed with depression. This is just one example of how the environment plays a fundamental role. Society as well. We learn through modeling others and repeating their behaviors. Today greed is very acceptable, so kids grow up nurturing it since those in power, those who society deems as "good" possess it.

 

 

Food, shelter, education are not rights. Although life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are.

 

I'm not talking about rights in a legal sense. I don't know why you are. The constitution isn't some divine document written by gods. It was written by men who wanted to set up a more fair system than monarchy. They succeeded, but like every system, it was only a product of its time and must change. The same with the ideas of Adam Smith and the economists who came after him. Systems are constantly changing.

 

Food, shelter, education are things that can be given to everybody. It's not about whether or not it's a "right" since society defines what a "right" is. Now we have to think pragmatically. The idea that food, shelter, and education should be earned is the idea that people should be motivated to have these things or else they'll just sit at home. This is based on an outdated view of psychology, a field that wasn't around in the 18th century when such ideas were created. We know that there is much more that motivates people than physiological safety. We desire communion with others, collaboration, creative opportunities, and the feeling of actually contributing to society.

 

If these things, food, shelter, education, etc. were given to everybody and the menial meaningless jobs taken care of through technology, people would surely be motivated to create and participate and be involved in something. Everybody has a passion for something. That's the hallmark of children, curiosity. But when a child's curiosity and passion are stomped on by the "reality" of having to work a meaningless job just to earn a living, then that person will most likely never regain that fire. Maybe he had some great idea, maybe the potential to revolutionize the world, but instead he has to work a soul-crushing desk job running equations in spreadsheets.

 

My point is that society would benefit much more if this passion was never stomped on. Curiosity, idealism, and the desire to passionately create something should be nurtured, and the best way to do that is to provide education and resources and not give people this fear that they have to contribute or else