The voices in my head often ask me why we live in the woods and the caves?
The answer is decidedly long so this diatribe gets its very own page and I would suggest taking it in a bit of a time as there is a lot of facts to digest.
When reading and watching the news you begin to see a trend where the gap between the rich and the poor is growing ever wider and not just the immigrants escaping Africa but European countries such as France and Brussels. Normal people, the vast population of the planet are struggling to make ends meet.
So what is the plan and what are the choices?
When you look deeply into the problem it is unavoidable not to see the banks featuring as the number one suspects in this global downturn. Lets face it that in 2008 the banks caused the global economy to crash because they were, basically gambling on bad debts to make more money. (Video below)
People like you and me laid off staff and tightened our belts whilst governments bailed out the banks with Billions of our hard taxed money which left less for the health, roads and educational establishments. A monstrous amount of our money diverted to the banks.
Most countries leaders are funded by banks - look at the millions spent in the US elections, President Macron of France is a banker! (WikiPedia - In September 2008, Macron left his job as an Inspector of Finances and took a position at Rothschild & Cie Banque)
So it is not a big stretch to see why the leaders decided to spend billions making sure that the banks were OK.
So in a nutshell money corrupts and is currently destroying the planet.
When humanity started using money it sounded like a great idea as how did you pay for something worth half a cow as it meant that the other half of the cow was lonely, so money became a token tied to the value of gold as that was something you could hold and trust and, until 1971 the US Dollar in the USA was valued on the Gold standard. To be fair the rest of the planet had previously ditched gold (UK in 1931) and because the USA currency was still based on gold the rest of the world trusted it and it became the standard until the "Nixon Shock"
Make sure you have no sharp objects nearby when watching this.
So now we use money across the world hoping that the other person in the transaction trusts the value printed on the piece of paper.
Having loads of money seems a great thing and bankers, pop stars and politicians love it, though, surprisingly they only account for 1 to 5% of the population and, as seen above and on the news the rest of the people are getting unhappy. They are not unhappy about having to do without the personal jet, butler or swimming pool cleaner byt because they cannot afford to send their children to school or in some cases to get food and shelter.
I wonder sometimes what would happen if we did not have money and what would be the alternative.
Most alternatives look at cashless economies and this scares the bejesus out of the banks - see Bitcoin and other virtual alternatives to money, and why not if actual money is worthless.What about Money (Taken from the Venus Project FAQ)
There are many disadvantages to using this old method of exchange for goods and services. We will consider just a few here and let you add to this list on your own:
Money is just an interference between what one needs and what one is able to get. It is not money that people need, it is access to resources.
The use of money results in social stratification and elitism based primarily on economic disparity.
People are not equal without equal purchasing power.
Most people are slaves to jobs they do not like because they need the money.
There is tremendous corruption, greed, crime, embezzlement, and more caused by the need for money.
Most laws are enacted for the benefit of corporations, which have enough money to lobby, bribe, or persuade government officials to make laws that serve their interests.
Those who control purchasing power have greater influence.
Money is used to control the behavior of those with limited purchasing power.
Goods such as foods are sometimes destroyed to keep prices up; when things are scarce prices increase.
There is tremendous waste of material and strain on available resources from superficial design changes for newer later fads each year in order to create continuous markets for manufacturers.
There is tremendous environmental degradation due to the high cost of better methods of waste disposal.
The Earth is being plundered for profit.
The benefits of technology are only distributed to those with sufficient purchasing power.
Most important, when the corporation’s bottom line is profit, decisions in all areas are made not for the benefit of people and the environment, but primarily for the acquisition of wealth, property, and power.
My choice is the Global Resource Based Economy which does not use money but is designed to share the planets resources so that everyone has a meal and a place for shelter and rather than rape our planets resources we manage them for the greater good not the banks, governments or corporate entities.
A snippet from ex President Bill Clinton on why immigrants are leaving Africa and other poor regions of the world.Today's global food crisis shows "we all blew it, including me when I was president," by treating food crops as commodities instead of as a vital right of the world's poor, Bill Clinton told a U.N. gathering on Thursday.The former president, addressing a high-level event marking Oct. 16's World Food Day, also saluted U.S. President George W. Bush - "one thing he got right" - for pushing for a change in U.S. food-aid policy. He chided the bipartisan coalition in the U.S. Congress that killed the idea.Clinton took aim at decades of international policymaking by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and others, encouraged by the U.S., that pressured Africans in particular into dropping government subsidies for fertilizer, improved seed and other farm inputs, in economic "structural adjustments" required to win northern aid. Africa's food self-sufficiency subsequently declined and food imports rose.Now skyrocketing prices in the international grain trade - on average more than doubling between 2006 and early 2008 - have pushed many in poor countries deeper into poverty.U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the U.N. gathering that prices on some food items are "500 percent higher than normal" in Haiti and Ethiopia, for example. The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization estimates the number of undernourished people worldwide rose to 923 million last year."Food is not a commodity like others," Clinton said. "We should go back to a policy of maximum food self-sufficiency. It is crazy for us to think we can develop countries around the world without increasing their ability to feed themselves."He noted that northern food aid could itself be a tool for boosting African agriculture.Canada, for example, requires that 50 percent of its aid go as cash - not as Canadian grain - to buy crops locally in Africa or other recipient countries. But U.S. law requires that almost all U.S. aid be American-grown food commodities, benefiting U.S. farmers. Bush proposed earlier this year that 25 percent of future aid be cash."A bipartisan coalition (in Congress) defeated him," the Democratic ex-president said of his Republican successor. "He was right, and both parties that defeated him were wrong."Clinton also criticized the heavy U.S. reliance on a food crop, corn, to produce ethanol for fuel, which helped drive up grain prices worldwide."If we're going to do biofuels, we ought to look at the more efficient kind," he said, referring, for example, to the jatropha shrub, a nonfood source that grows on land not suitable for grain.The U.N. General Assembly president, Nicaragua's Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, agreed, speaking of the "madness of converting crops into fuel."D'Escoto expressed disappointment that of $22 billion pledged by richer nations to help poorer nations' agriculture in this year of food crisis, only $2.2 billion has been made available.Opening the hour-long meeting, U.N. chief Ban expressed dismay at the potential impact of the global financial crisis on world hunger."While the international community is focused on turmoil in the global economy, I am extremely concerned that not enough is being done to help those who are suffering most: the poorest of the poor," he said.© 2008 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
On reflection what would a society be like with no money would it look like Star Trek?
I suppose crime would suffer as why rob someone if they have no money or if you cannot sell what you have stolen.
How would everyone be clothed and happy.
There are many answers on https://www.thevenusproject.com/
as believe it or not they have spent decades planning for this though I can quickly show some of the ideas so you get the gist.
At the moment we have countless brands of countless products destined for the great landfill that is Earth. What if we had one brand and wasted a lot less resources, keeping spares would be a doddle and it would be the best as no point making everyone use a crappy TV/washing machine that is only designed to work just past its guarantee date.Taken from the Venus project.
The Venus Project proposes an alternative vision of what the future can be if we apply what we already know in order to achieve a sustainable new world civilization. It calls for a straightforward redesign of our culture in which the age-old inadequacies of war, poverty, hunger, debt and unnecessary human suffering are viewed not only as avoidable, but as totally unacceptable. Anything less will result in a continuation of the same catalog of problems inherent in today's world.The Venus Project is a part of Resource Based Economy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
The Venus Project proposes a system in which automation and technology would be intelligently integrated into an overall holistic socio-economic design where the primary function would be to maximize the quality of life rather than profit.
If all the money in the world were destroyed, as long as we have sufficient arable land, the factories, the necessary resources, and technical personnel, we could build anything and even supply an abundance. During the Depression, there were vacuum cleaners in store windows and automobiles in car lots. The Earth was still the same place. There was just no money in people’s wallets and very little purchasing power. At the beginning of World War II, the U.S. had about 600 first-class fighting aircraft. We rapidly overcame this short-supply by turning out over 90,000 planes per year. The question at the start of World War II was: Do we have enough funds to produce the required implements of war? The answer was No, we did not have enough money or gold, but we did have more than enough resources. It was the available resources and technical personnel that enabled the U.S. to achieve the production and efficiency required to win the war.
It appears that the real wealth of any nation is in its natural resources and its people who are working toward a more humane life-style through the elimination of scarcity. All social systems, regardless of the political philosophy, religious beliefs, or social mores, ultimately depend upon natural resources — i.e. clean air and water and arable land area — and the industrial equipment and technical personnel for a high standard of living. The money- based system was designed hundreds of years ago and was hardly appropriate for that time. We still utilize this same outmoded system, which is probably responsible for most of today’s problems. I have no doubt that even the wealthiest person today would be far better off in the high-energy society that The Venus Project proposes.
So that is what I think about money and how there might be a better way an alternative though personally I am worried that a lot of advertisers, bankers, accountants, thieves, politicians, lawyers, drug and crime lords will need to look for alternative employment.