[Nicodimas]

Here you all go with statistics included. This something that needs to be talk about from the household debt issue to the Goverment issue. It seems to me this will end hitting us all (Western world) The goal is to avoid this reality. Back in economic theory 100% GDP to DEBT is what I was taught is not sustainable.

Well of course we could just ignore this and go on our way...until the big Kaboom happens.

Orginal Report:
http://www.bis.org/p....pdf?noframes=1
Zerohedge one:
http://www.zerohedge...p-over-400-2040

So what do you think with current era of spending in the states and future soverign defaults? Greece will be the first Domino IMO. We obviously don't want this so what to do?

This post has been edited by Nicodimas: 09 April 2010 - 08:32 PM

[Sinisdar Toste]

yes yes the current model of global economics doesn't work, debt as currency is a flawed system, everyone's buying and spending their way into a hellhole of interest rates and shoddy contracts. riots are erupting all over the globe, fat cats and politicians laugh it up and smoke three cuban cigars at once while joe the plumber gets fired from the plumbing corp and looses his car and home. the government thinks spending and minting is a solution and this is all compacted onto the fact that our entire way of life is based on a resource that has millions of muslims who hate us all sitting on it. banks and financial institutions continue to practice casino-style investing and every line on every chart is red and going downwards.
we're being strung along like a junky on his final comedown before he dies in a conflagration of useless currency, power outages, resource shortages and natural disasters. the end is nigh!

sorry nic, but all you seem to do around here is doomsay and its getting kind of tired.

[Nicodimas]

Sin- you misunderstood<I will be posting a survival thread someday..one of buddies is thinking of starting a school on it>...Like I said I being optimistic about what occurs after lately. I think we could really get a better system in place instead of what happened in the 30s.

What are some meaningful solutions we could get going. Let's think outside the box

1. Change tax brackets..Everyone pays something..I am not against raising taxes if you not against make sure everyone pays for a say. In the US 47% of people do not pay taxes, enlarge the bases.

2. Ensure that the capital gains tax is reduced to a maximum of 50% of the income tax rate of each individual investor.

3. Provide income tax credits to businesses that hire new employees.

4. Allow IRA contributions of up to $20,000 per year. Get rid of Social Security for everyone at a certain age.

5. Allow what amounts to cafeteria style medical savings/spending accounts - use it or lose it - of up to $5k per year for all medical related expenses.

6. Eliminate the inheritance tax (ok, a bit off topic, but indulge me just a little...).

7. Allow parents to deduct up to 20k per year per child for education related expenses - tuition, books, etc.

8. Create merit based scholarship funding.

9. Medicare is reformed.

10. Those who receive welfare and Medicaid do not vote; nor do felons.

11. Review all program cut the FAT, trim all programs to fit in the budget.

12. Make it so politicians cannot randomly increase decrease taxes at will. Make it a certain percentage maybe.

13. Spend within 90% of the budget each year from the year before tax incomes.

14. Find a System to have everyone vote on where there money is going. Have the public offical held accountable if they are way off what people want money spent on.

15) Have people send there taxes in monthly. People get cut the full check monthly. This should ellicit change.

16) Have there be one single TAX per area. VAT for corporations. Flat Tax for People. Back to basics!


Thank Sinistar Toste for that amazing post detailing exactly what will happen. It think the math plus the end result really points to why we need dto do this today! Ok I want to see some good ideas...

This post has been edited by Nicodimas: 09 April 2010 - 08:31 PM

[Vesper]

Here's an idea: abolish money.

It has no intrinsic value (other than being paper and ink since it ceased being a voucher for gold), it is the most flagrant system of social stratification employed in the entire world (big name CEOs today have the relative net worth of dukes and counts from 500 years ago), and is supported by even more gratuitous systems (read up on fractional reserve banking... really, go nuts!).

Instead of a money/debt/credit-based system embrace a resource-based system. We shouldn't need to pay electricity bills when we have the means to produce such energy in effectively limitless amounts. We shouldn't need to purchase food if it is in such abundance. We shouldn't need to worry about trade, even, as there is enough of literally everything to go around.

Houses with solar panels on the roof would be able to collect and store their own heat if the panels are made with technology we have today (not just commercial stuff that the companies who have patented all the revolutionary technology allow to be released). Fields of wind turbines set up in the Midwest could power most of the country if in sufficient numbers (which are not really as staggeringly high as you might think). Most impressive, however, is geothermal energy. Every year the Earth puts out 2,000 ZJ (zettajoules) of geothermal energy. For comparison purposes, all the nations on the planet combined use only 0.5 ZJ of energy per year. In other words: if we were to harness the energy output of the Earth for one year, we would have gathered 4,000 years worth of energy.

We have the technology to fashion machines to perform the menial tasks, even up to and including fixing themselves if they break. If society stops tolerating new technology being patented by the bigger companies so it can sit in some basement somewhere and not screw up their monopoly of the market then we can progress to employ it and eliminate human starvation, poverty, and (most) suffering. People would never have to work, and could instead pursue their real dreams. If we can get the technology employed, we'd quickly find no further need for money.

The Debt-Based society is only a symptom of the larger problem. It, in turn, causes many other symptoms, but our current financial paradigms are not the hinge issue facing the modern world today.

[Sinisdar Toste]

well, don't i feel like a right prig now, lol. sorry bout the quick draw assumption that this was gonna be a doom and gloom thread there, nic (guess i'm not cut out for brynjars hate thread).

on topic then:

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

Sin- you misunderstood<I will be posting a survival thread someday..one of buddies is thinking of starting a school on it>...Like I said I being optimistic about what occurs after lately. I think we could really get a better system in place instead of what happened in the 30s.

i love the idea of a survival school. would he include things like hunting, fire-building without a heat source, cold-weather shelter building, botany and other such outdoorsie things? cuz that i would love to do

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

What are some meaningful solutions we could get going. Let's think outside the box

indeed, let's! i'm with vesper on the abolition of money. it ain't never done me any good on its own, and it just seems like a ridiculously unnecessary middle man these days. a resource-based economy is the way that humankind will truly see progress in the 3rd millenium.

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

5. Allow what amounts to cafeteria style medical savings/spending accounts - use it or lose it - of up to $5k per year for all medical related expenses.

so... there would be no accumulation of money over the years in some sort of medicare account? and the 5K would just go back into a public fund?? it could work, but unfortunately 5k would quickly be exhausted if anything serious were to occur. of course i'd rather that we don't involve money in the affair at all.

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

7. Allow parents to deduct up to 20k per year per child for education related expenses - tuition, books, etc.

good idea. would allow low-income families to afford better schools and universities for their children.

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

8. Create merit based scholarship funding.

this has already started i think. in a way. in... florida? i think. they're proposing setting teachers salaries by standardized tests scores. of course thats quite different from merit based funding of schools and could punish good teachers who don't have much to work with. but its a start

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

10. Those who receive welfare and Medicaid do not vote; nor do felons.

so, basically, people who are a drain on the state do not get to influence who is running the state. not sure how i feel about this one. one the one hand all the seniors will get their adult diapers in a knot about having their rights to vote taken away, but on the other hand, they don't work, they get their healthcare for free and there are becoming more and more of them. tough call.

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

11. Review all program cut the FAT, trim all programs to fit in the budget.

this is a must. all that talk about pork-barreling and earmarks is usually just used as a political weapon, but if you could get a real impartial audit of the budget that would be great.

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

14. Find a System to have everyone vote on where there money is going. Have the public offical held accountable if they are way off what people want money spent on.

this leads into the idea of a more localized model of government decision making. the province of kerala in india is a good example of how localized planning and full local control of funds and budgeting can improve peoples standard of living.

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

15) Have people send there taxes in monthly. People get cut the full check monthly. This should ellicit change.

certainly worth a shot. of course people will whine about the inconvenience but they'll get used to it.

Nicodimas, on 09 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

Thank Sinistar Toste for that amazing post detailing exactly what will happen.

i feel like this is sarcasm, but it sounds sincere. either way i suppose i deserve it

anyway, here's a few more ideas.

legislate against monopolies. start right away and break these fuckers up. six congolomerates control basically all of the worlds media, we all know about the 'too big to fail' banks and their consistently unrepentant CEO's and i think its four companies that control most of the food production in the US.

revoke and destroy the idea of corporate personhood. this single facet of american law has caused untold damage to the entire world, from the environment to the middle class. corporate personhood is a gross injustice and it makes me sick.

here's my favourite "never gonna happen but should because its a no-brainer," idea: outlaw oil and tell oil companies that they can keep making money, just take all their billions and invest in alternative energy. geothermal, solar, wind, methane, tide, wave, hydro etc. its so obvious that we have to stop burning fossil fuels i just wanna throttle every oil company CEO and drag them kicking and screaming into the future.

[Trull's son]

I have difficulty understanding how a resource based economy would function. Would it not lead to bartering? I am not saying bartering is a bad thing, but it would definitely lead to a convoluted mess of a system. Five tons of pork for three million blankets??? based on my restricted understanding, i doubt that there would be a way to make such a system work. Let's not even get into intellectual property.

[Sinisdar Toste]

here's a basic overview of the idea, formulated by jacque fresno who is also the man in charge of the venus project (possibly the most ambitious and wondrous vision of a new world order around)
clicky

[Jusentantaka]

Sinisdar Toste, on 10 April 2010 - 04:51 AM, said:

here's a basic overview of the idea, formulated by jacque fresno who is also the man in charge of the venus project (possibly the most ambitious and wondrous vision of a new world order around)
clicky

Ugh. Me thinks I'll pass, thanks. All I can see is a future full of 47 year-old virgins sitting around in their beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing 'I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener.' Out of tune, no less.

While charming and idealistic, how's this any different really? Its just a new and supposedly benevolent elite rewriting the world to be how they want it. Plus greed, crime and abuse were around long before our current system came into being, and its not going anywhere.

[Trull's son]

Ah, my thanks. Well from what i read, this system would award the same resources (or ratio) to everyone in a sense that each person would have more than enough of the world's "plentiful resources". So, aside from humanity's intrinsic greed, who would decide the amount of these resources to be given to each person? what would be the point of doing anything if one would be given the means to survive (free-rider effect)?

Whoever controls the resources would control the people. I would be more than reticent with my support of such a system.

Of course, I would worry about boredom, and how people would cope with said boredom with all their free time.

[Darkwatch]

The problem with this system and all Utopian systems is the fact that it relies on the human species developing a proper sense of responsibility.
It's like the Alcubierre drive and wormholes, they rely on some sort of unspecified exotic matter that we don't have and may not even exist.

I want these things. I desperately want them to work.
But... the species as a whole needs to change.

It's why I believe the next step of human evolution will be defined rather through intellectual/cognitive/psychological evolution than through physiological changes.

Some people have proposed to name the next version of humanity: Homo Superior. Unless it that version is indeed a responsible and psychologically evolved individual then I'm going with the Transhumanist terminology (transhuman, posthuman, human 2.0) to fill the gaps until we truly are superior.

[Sinisdar Toste]

well yeah its a nice dream. there's just so much to overcome about human nature. lack of responsibility, greed, etc etc. you all know the rest.

baby steps, i guess. baby steps

[Sindriss]

Quote

this has already started i think. in a way. in... florida? i think. they're proposing setting teachers salaries by standardized tests scores. of course thats quite different from merit based funding of schools and could punish good teachers who don't have much to work with. but its a start

Sorry, but this is already what is wrong with the system. A standardized test just teaches the kids to memorize facts (which are mostly useless) and not to learn how to analyze and problemsolve.

[Vesper]

Trull, on 10 April 2010 - 05:33 AM, said:

Ah, my thanks. Well from what i read, this system would award the same resources (or ratio) to everyone in a sense that each person would have more than enough of the world's "plentiful resources". So, aside from humanity's intrinsic greed, who would decide the amount of these resources to be given to each person? what would be the point of doing anything if one would be given the means to survive (free-rider effect)?

Whoever controls the resources would control the people. I would be more than reticent with my support of such a system.

Of course, I would worry about boredom, and how people would cope with said boredom with all their free time.

You may be surprised to know, Trull, but these questions/concerns have been the cornerstone of skepticism regarding this movement. There also happen to be perfectly reasonable and logical answers.

Regarding allotment of resources: the problem of the distribution of resources today is the largest obstacle to the expansion of the human population. Many people believe that the world is overpopulated, but, in fact, if resources were allocated properly we could easily support a population of much, much greater size. (Note: personally, I would rather we stopped having 8 million children each, as there will be a critical mass point regardless of how everything is set up...) The distribution of resources wouldn't be on a per capita basis, but rather on a regional basis factoring in the population of each region. Nobody would control the resources exclusively, and nobody will have to because there will be more than enough to go around.

Regarding the 'purpose' of living, it won't change. What do you do now? You go to work to fund your hobbies... or turn work into your hobby. Innumerable psychological studies have been conducted that clearly indicate that, even in the absence of necessity, people will construct activities to achieve not only entertainment, but fulfillment. The Greeks and Romans are often considered as they had slaves to do their menial work. However, Greeks and Romans still had jobs in order to support their families, so it isn't quite a perfect analogy. Essentially, you will have much more freedom to choose your own path, and you won't need to worry about financing your habits. Painters will paint because they enjoy painting, and give paintings away because they want the person to whom they give the painting to also enjoy it. Authors will write for their personal satisfaction, and their works can be read by anybody without need for them to find a publisher or anything because information will travel freely. Scientists won't need to worry about grants to study the natural world and test hypotheses that will one day allow us to cure cancer, or travel between the stars.

It isn't naivety that guides the idea of a resource based society, it's simply the premise that greed is based on the notion of scarcity, and if there is no scarcity of resources (be they energy, food, or even non-essentials) there will be no need for greed. You should really read more into it, because it's so in-depth and eye opening.

[Trull's son]

Thank you Vesper for the information, and I will definitely take your advice and read more about the subject.
It seems that it is way beyond our ability as a species to redefine the way our system works -- and has worked for many years -- in a manner that equally distributes the population and resources across the entire world. The logistics would be mind-boggling, and would rely on the co-operation of the planet as a whole.

[Gothos]

I'm having trouble picturing people picking some of the less appealing jobs just for "fun and fulfillment". Miners, for instance. People behind the counter in fast foods and waiters. Restroom cleaners. Street sweepers. Teachers. Numerous others.
This idea would need drastic technological advancement to push the mundane works onto machines, and the learning process onto downloadable content like in the Matrix.
It's a possibility for the future, but not in our lifetime.

[rhulad]

Gothos, on 12 April 2010 - 07:29 AM, said:

I'm having trouble picturing people picking some of the less appealing jobs just for "fun and fulfillment". Miners, for instance. People behind the counter in fast foods and waiters. Restroom cleaners. Street sweepers. Teachers. Numerous others.
This idea would need drastic technological advancement to push the mundane works onto machines, and the learning process onto downloadable content like in the Matrix.
It's a possibility for the future, but not in our lifetime.

There are a lot of people that love to teach, not me but I do happen to know about 15 people that do. And as far as all the shitty jobs that nobody wants, and you can't build machines to do, those are what you give to the people that would otherwise do nothing.

[Gothos]

Why would they do them if they could just do nothing without a measurement of work's worth? There's nothing.

As for the teaching, the people that like it are a staggering minority. Low pay and very stressful working conditions. That society would be hard pressed to find enough teachers for all them children, unless you want to make classes of 300 students.

[Sinisdar Toste]

i think that they're resting their premises on the assumption that in this future society, thankless jobs wouldn't be so thankless. that the true value of teaching would be recognized and being a teacher would be touted as a most virtuous occupation. 'low pay' as a concept wouldn't even be part of our psyche and all working conditions would be regulated by technology to be at optimal levels for teachers and students. it assumes a lot of social and technological advancements that would never happen in our lifetimes, but could hopefully be embraced by future generations.

[Nicodimas]

For your future reference:
http://www.zerohedge...e-get-us?page=1
http://www.zerohedge...mpaign-promises
--> Just some good old facts and really handy in conversation. Very easy to understand.

To me this data supports what everyone is saying we need to abolish the complicated trade system. Settle on simplier system. It's baby steps at first and if we could find a way to simplify and blend a barter system in there, this would make things better. I'm to much of a capitalist to say corporation are ruining society, but society at this point has led itself astray through it's own greed for cheap crap. This caused our own misery <started in the early 70's>, as we exported the same jobs that made America great.

One thing we could do is mandate shorter work weeks(30 hours) and close to same pay. This would hopefully create a 2nd economy where people could work on there crafts/family. So you have your main job, and you fun hobby to make a extra bit of swag by trading something your good at. School's could then focus on Theory and Mutiple Hard-based skill that I keep rambling on about. I also think this would bring back a proper family unit if people chose to do so. Basically instead of shifting the taxes to the rich, shift the work production to the middle class. This could level out the economy in fairer way. If you do this with a flat tax it would be a great way to shift the economy the correct way.

Now theortically this would keep more people employeed at there primary job and hopefully create a *three* day work week. If you look at the industrial revolution there work weeks were 100 hours+ for shitty pay and throughout the last one hundred years we have slowly drawn it down. People at there main job would be more effective as there job would be a job of choice.

Payroll is the biggest budgetary expense on the book. People would need a serious dose of education on how to truly budget there money. Hell, I would have to follow my own guide on how to spend money correctly. Everyone would have mutiple jobs, but you would have the freedom to allocate the time to your second job. It would make it far easier to pursue school and switch jobs at will if needed. I also think the choice of spending money of current education, hard skills, and art based education would introduce the proper amount of competition to drive down costs. Just work two primary jobs and flip it over if you like it, or quit if you don't. This would also let you master your hobby-job and if you wanted to start your own business would give you a chance if you got good at it. Or these people could volunteer in anywhere they felt was needed. It's a Win/Win/Win. The Corporations Win. The Individual Wins. Goverment Wins. People would have more skills versus being so specialized, indepence from your main field is a staggering undertaking. People usually have to do a total reboot on there career.

So that's my small idea of instead of raising taxes, mess with the work week. You can work this into the current system fairly easily and we have the human resources at this point to allow for this.

This would be a great stepping stone.

This post has been edited by Nicodimas: 13 April 2010 - 05:16 AM