A new type of economy

Originally Posted by Gem

The fundamental problem is writing a global policy and expecting people to live according to it. The next problem is, everyone's gonna want the latest Farrari every year. Everyone wants a super yacht and a Lear jet and so on.

I don't want a Ferrari. If someone gave me one I'd sell it and use the money to buy a nice house overlooking a nice patch of the med, with a big fence around it so I could keep my stuff to myself

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Badger1777

I don't want a Ferrari. If someone gave me one I'd sell it and use the money to buy a nice house overlooking a nice patch of the med, with a big fence around it so I could keep my stuff to myself

Point being, if I wanted a new TV there's nothing to pay, so I just go get one, and chuck last year's away.

In your case you could just go get a place on the Med for free, so no need to sell the Ferrari.

Originally Posted by Gem

Point being, if I wanted a new TV there's nothing to pay, so I just go get one, and chuck last year's away.

In your case you could just go get a place on the Med for free, so no need to sell the Ferrari.

I know. I got your point, and was agreeing with it. There is a finite number of places where you can put a house overlooking the med, so for me to just take one without working for it and earning it, I'd be preventing someone else from just taking that spot. Likewise if it was my right to just have one, why not attempt to take someone else's? Hence why I'd put a big secure fence round mine to keep people out.

So then the law is changed to help regulate matters, maybe by saying that you can't simply take something, you have to earn it or be given it. Then after centuries of feuding, we could get together and devise some sort of 'Great Charta', or to make it sound more cool, perhaps call it something like 'Magna Carta', which would underpin all future laws and ideas of right and wrong and pave the way for some sort of democratic capitalism.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Badger1777

I know. I got your point, and was agreeing with it. There is a finite number of places where you can put a house overlooking the med, so for me to just take one without working for it and earning it, I'd be preventing someone else from just taking that spot. Likewise if it was my right to just have one, why not attempt to take someone else's? Hence why I'd put a big secure fence round mine to keep people out.

So then the law is changed to help regulate matters, maybe by saying that you can't simply take something, you have to earn it or be given it. Then after centuries of feuding, we could get together and devise some sort of 'Great Charta', or to make it sound more cool, perhaps call it something like 'Magna Carta', which would underpin all future laws and ideas of right and wrong and pave the way for some sort of democratic capitalism.

There's a fundamental flaw in advocating a global policy because nature tends toward diversity. In that there is a huge diversity of climates, and thus localised ecologies, human culture would naturally be very diverse if it were reflective of nature.

People think they can have a civilisation that disregards nature, and even the eco systems must cohere to the policy that people make, as we need to adapt the landscape in order to implement 'civilised policy'.

Actually, there are laws of nature which can not be broken anyway, but Mankind is quite foolish and doesn't understand natures way despite having vast knowledge in science.

Then we suppose a technocratic automated robotic global philosophy could work because we suffer the delusion that we actually control things, but alas, we don't. We succumb to the forces of nature and the balance of the universe.

[Kiki04]

Originally Posted by elisi

sounds alot like the native american ways of long ago. share the bounty-everybody benefits. children are literally raised by the village. less work more play.

Yes! Such a wonderful way to live, no?