"The rest of your argument, including that from your other post, can hardly be addressed, because what you're saying makes so little sense unless you define money as tokens representing physical thingies (and not that much even if you do, IMHO)."
That's all money is today since we did away with hard money in the United States around 1971 I believe. There is no blocks of gold anymore that actually backup the value of your dollar. Hence they now only represent the value of a product, they aren't worth anything themselves except for maybe colored paper and quite the dazzle of printing technology.
We are actually playing a near zero-sum game since we do live on a planet, not an infinite plane of endless resources. The only time you could be playing in a slight positive end game is when you get your energy directly from the sun. In the end that doesn't count because the sun only has so much energy to give.
If you want to take progress as who can destroy life the fastest go ahead, but if you look at life density in the world since the so called great industrial revolution Earths population has drastically decreased in terms of over all life. If it would continue at its current rate the only thing left on earth will be humans and machines that turn raw chemicles into other raw chemicles for us to use. That's where the whole Borg idea came from in star trek, earth becoming one big solid mass of raw chemicles with humans going ooh ahh, more technology at all costs even life in general.
Wage laws only apply to soft money economies since you can easily create money with out any corresponding value until after the fact. They wouldn't apply in trading real goods, or what is called hard money contributions in campaigns.
They'd belong to non-profit systems, as the only way profit could result is the direct exploitation of a human along the line. For teachers this wouldn't change much. The current main problem with their salary it's mainly decided by a legislature that wastes about 50% of its discretionary budget on the military so there is no lack of money for them.
Lawyers, heh.. if the law requires lawyers then the laws are too complex(the majority are based on crack pot ideas where ownership is translated as a master and not as a care taker which is all it is... quite literally for the land anyways. Most slashdotters know that intellectual property is about as backwards as ownership gets). About as far as copyrights go with artistic material should be with just a few years at the most. The whole ironic part of that is most of the artists don't even get much more then a fraction of the money made under their work in the current system anyways. Lawyers provide other services but I for one do not want exploitation in the justice system. Same with accountants. The stock market has become a flat out joke for all the "services" it provides. Mainly bad fortune telling that effects peoples lives while real productivity doesn't change a bit.
The majority of the U.S. economy is mostly service because we rip other countries off so much that we have more money then we deserve to waste on services.
Alot of the things included as "services" aren't all services, like mechanical, and janitors(the ones that aren't all cleaning).
The best system I've seen for services that modify products besides non-profit is the 4x minimum wage type plan. They would get the costs of the products used in the service, and then would get 2x to 3x more of the minimum wage as a maximum.
You are also fooling yourself if you think the maximum wage would even effect the majority of americans, or even a large minority. The limit would be set around twenty-two bucks an hour based on a 40 hour work week. The real range is much greater then 4x as you have to factor in many services which can vary from a few hours a day to around near ten and usually longer days as k-12 teachers. Which sets the limit up even greater then you think.
"The Open model fails as soon as money starts to interfere. (remember man-power is almost free in an Open world)"
For one simple reason, money is no longer money. Now money is suppose to be an object that represents(key word here!) the value of real things, eg: food, cars, and etc... The problem is that at least here in America money has become seen as a real thing, and it is now valued more then life, food, cars, and etc.
An example of how this little switcheroo plays out in the average factory is as follows. You have workers, they are being paid for work, and not their products today. Which isn't how it should be as this creates several problems, one being the ability to profit off of humans(just double speak for exploitation, look it up in the dictionary if you have to). The other major problem is moral checking begins to take place after the actions of companies, and not before the action takes place.
So happy little Joe is swimming in his lake. A paper company up stream is bleaching paper like no other. The workers had no planning in this, and they can't directly be blamed(but they still can be in an indirect way.. well duh, hehe:). The workers didn't protest it because if they did they woulld only be able to protest by quitting. They couldn't take their product they(key word #2) made away from the company. As under our current system work and service has been mixed up and workers are now paid as in a service deal.
The obvious answer to this is simple, the workers own the products they make. They sell it to the company. This is factored into the system in an autonomous way so that when they don't like what is going on they can just pull out with the product making the company unable to profit off of them. Which is why companies are so against it, they will no longer be able to treat work as a service and in hand be able to factor in humans within their profits(which as you can recall, is exploitations).
Now the common defense against this is that the laws of supply and demand will be a check against this. What has happened though is many companies now act as one big super company controlling the supply they need for the other part of the company. They can also effect the demand through marketing hype(microsoft anybody?). The other problem is when this system was set up it factored in a centralized system, but it is no longer with a center. Now what happens is paper company A clear cuts a forrest in location B. By the time people in location of company A find out about this, it's too late.
These problems are now being exploited by many companies. They goto another country and by the time the citizens of the U.S. find out, the exploitation has been done. Now many problems like these are still ignored by the U.S. They say, who gives a rats ass about the evil chinese(NOTE: this is just figurative and is what is said, i do not agree with it at all, most chinese people I know are nice and caring like any other human being). Well, when our plan for everybody using our current economic system goes into action, you'll surely care then. Not to mention the fact that many have become dependant on these sweatshop outfits and the simple act of saying no can mean a world of pain for them, and they can't simply leave due to immigration laws. Unfortunately by then it will be to late and the exploitation will have already been done.
If you are wondering how this system has the ability to go unchecked by the collective masses is simple. Our government defines progress of companies based off of profits. They don't care weather it's from the people or from the earth, weather its over all effect will be bad or not. They include all profits in it... both good and bad. An example of this is the smoking industry, and beauty industry. Look at what ciggarettes do to your lungs, oh that's nice.. we'll tax it and get a profit off of lung cancer.. so we can say, look how much it helps our economy! Not to even mention what the beauty industry has done to peoples self interests. Now to any sane person you would not claim this to be progess, but that is exactly what our government does.
Now, what would be wrong with that? My gosh, people might find out the truth! Then they might see why people run Linux, that woud just be terrible. The worst scenario, Windows computers everywhere drop out leaving those with "secure" operating systems stil standing. All of these "hacker script kiddies" that get the label of some great cool monkey by some teenage crowds are now seen as fools taking advantage of other fools. Yeah, some businesses might be severely damaged, but Microsoft gets the label they should have. Everybody switches to a "secure" OS, and the world is one step coser to reality.
Slashdot Mirror
"The rest of your argument, including that from your other post, can hardly be addressed, because what you're saying makes so little sense unless you define money as tokens representing physical thingies (and not that much even if you do, IMHO)."
That's all money is today since we did away with hard money in the United States around 1971 I believe. There is no blocks of gold anymore that actually backup the value of your dollar. Hence they now only represent the value of a product, they aren't worth anything themselves except for maybe colored paper and quite the dazzle of printing technology.
We are actually playing a near zero-sum game since we do live on a planet, not an infinite plane of endless resources. The only time you could be playing in a slight positive end game is when you get your energy directly from the sun. In the end that doesn't count because the sun only has so much energy to give.
If you want to take progress as who can destroy life the fastest go ahead, but if you look at life density in the world since the so called great industrial revolution Earths population has drastically decreased in terms of over all life. If it would continue at its current rate the only thing left on earth will be humans and machines that turn raw chemicles into other raw chemicles for us to use. That's where the whole Borg idea came from in star trek, earth becoming one big solid mass of raw chemicles with humans going ooh ahh, more technology at all costs even life in general.
Wage laws only apply to soft money economies since you can easily create money with out any corresponding value until after the fact. They wouldn't apply in trading real goods, or what is called hard money contributions in campaigns.
heh, so now instead we can fill it with radioactive waste.. wohooo!!!
They'd belong to non-profit systems, as the only way profit could result is the direct exploitation of a human along the line. For teachers this wouldn't change much. The current main problem with their salary it's mainly decided by a legislature that wastes about 50% of its discretionary budget on the military so there is no lack of money for them.
Lawyers, heh.. if the law requires lawyers then the laws are too complex(the majority are based on crack pot ideas where ownership is translated as a master and not as a care taker which is all it is... quite literally for the land anyways. Most slashdotters know that intellectual property is about as backwards as ownership gets). About as far as copyrights go with artistic material should be with just a few years at the most. The whole ironic part of that is most of the artists don't even get much more then a fraction of the money made under their work in the current system anyways. Lawyers provide other services but I for one do not want exploitation in the justice system. Same with accountants. The stock market has become a flat out joke for all the "services" it provides. Mainly bad fortune telling that effects peoples lives while real productivity doesn't change a bit.
The majority of the U.S. economy is mostly service because we rip other countries off so much that we have more money then we deserve to waste on services.
Alot of the things included as "services" aren't all services, like mechanical, and janitors(the ones that aren't all cleaning).
The best system I've seen for services that modify products besides non-profit is the 4x minimum wage type plan. They would get the costs of the products used in the service, and then would get 2x to 3x more of the minimum wage as a maximum.
You are also fooling yourself if you think the maximum wage would even effect the majority of americans, or even a large minority. The limit would be set around twenty-two bucks an hour based on a 40 hour work week. The real range is much greater then 4x as you have to factor in many services which can vary from a few hours a day to around near ten and usually longer days as k-12 teachers. Which sets the limit up even greater then you think.
"The Open model fails as soon as money starts to interfere. (remember man-power is almost free in an Open world)"
:). The workers didn't protest it because if they did they woulld only be able to protest by quitting. They couldn't take their product they(key word #2) made away from the company. As under our current system work and service has been mixed up and workers are now paid as in a service deal.
For one simple reason, money is no longer money. Now money is suppose to be an object that represents(key word here!) the value of real things, eg: food, cars, and etc... The problem is that at least here in America money has become seen as a real thing, and it is now valued more then life, food, cars, and etc.
An example of how this little switcheroo plays out in the average factory is as follows. You have workers, they are being paid for work, and not their products today. Which isn't how it should be as this creates several problems, one being the ability to profit off of humans(just double speak for exploitation, look it up in the dictionary if you have to). The other major problem is moral checking begins to take place after the actions of companies, and not before the action takes place.
So happy little Joe is swimming in his lake. A paper company up stream is bleaching paper like no other. The workers had no planning in this, and they can't directly be blamed(but they still can be in an indirect way.. well duh, hehe
The obvious answer to this is simple, the workers own the products they make. They sell it to the company. This is factored into the system in an autonomous way so that when they don't like what is going on they can just pull out with the product making the company unable to profit off of them. Which is why companies are so against it, they will no longer be able to treat work as a service and in hand be able to factor in humans within their profits(which as you can recall, is exploitations).
Now the common defense against this is that the laws of supply and demand will be a check against this. What has happened though is many companies now act as one big super company controlling the supply they need for the other part of the company. They can also effect the demand through marketing hype(microsoft anybody?). The other problem is when this system was set up it factored in a centralized system, but it is no longer with a center. Now what happens is paper company A clear cuts a forrest in location B. By the time people in location of company A find out about this, it's too late.
These problems are now being exploited by many companies. They goto another country and by the time the citizens of the U.S. find out, the exploitation has been done. Now many problems like these are still ignored by the U.S. They say, who gives a rats ass about the evil chinese(NOTE: this is just figurative and is what is said, i do not agree with it at all, most chinese people I know are nice and caring like any other human being). Well, when our plan for everybody using our current economic system goes into action, you'll surely care then. Not to mention the fact that many have become dependant on these sweatshop outfits and the simple act of saying no can mean a world of pain for them, and they can't simply leave due to immigration laws. Unfortunately by then it will be to late and the exploitation will have already been done.
If you are wondering how this system has the ability to go unchecked by the collective masses is simple. Our government defines progress of companies based off of profits. They don't care weather it's from the people or from the earth, weather its over all effect will be bad or not. They include all profits in it... both good and bad. An example of this is the smoking industry, and beauty industry. Look at what ciggarettes do to your lungs, oh that's nice.. we'll tax it and get a profit off of lung cancer.. so we can say, look how much it helps our economy! Not to even mention what the beauty industry has done to peoples self interests. Now to any sane person you would not claim this to be progess, but that is exactly what our government does.
Now, what would be wrong with that? My gosh, people might find out the truth! Then they might see why people run Linux, that woud just be terrible. The worst scenario, Windows computers everywhere drop out leaving those with "secure" operating systems stil standing. All of these "hacker script kiddies" that get the label of some great cool monkey by some teenage crowds are now seen as fools taking advantage of other fools. Yeah, some businesses might be severely damaged, but Microsoft gets the label they should have. Everybody switches to a "secure" OS, and the world is one step coser to reality.