Incentive: The need for profit provides a person or organization with motivation to work on new ideas and products that might sell in the market.
The assumption is that if people were not motivated by their need to obtain money nothing would be invented and little social progress would be achieved. First of all, the most powerful contributions to society did not come from people seeking profit; Louis Pasteur, Charles Darwin, The Reich Brothers(SP?), Albert Einstein, and Isaac Newton did not make their massive contributions to society because of material self-interest. While it is true useful inventions and methods do come from the motivation for personal gain, the intent behind those creations typically had nothing to do with human or social concerns, and everything to do with detached, self-interest, and blind personal gain.
The pursuit of profit almost always comes before human concern. And a simple glance at the cancer causing preservatives in our foods, planned obsolescence in nearly everything manufactured, along with a healthcare industry that charges $300 for a single anti-biotic pill, will indicate that the profit incentive is actually a detriment.
Problems in a monetary based society will only have a resolution, if money can be made from solving those problems.
So you don't believe in the existence of property rights? Notice that property rights extent to your own body.
Quote: from Aimforthehead at 2:03 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from Moridin at 1:15 pm on July 10, 2009 Aimforthehead, do you believe in property rights? Do you believe in self-ownership? If you believe in self-ownership (you do, otherwise you could not use your vocal cords to talk back to me, or in this case, your fingers to type a response), then you must believe that I have the right to the fruits of my labor too, that is, property rights? Do you believe in the principle of non-aggression? That I have the right to not have my body violated by others? If so, how can you not believe in property rights? They are two sides of the same coin. If non-aggression is valid, then i own my body and vice versa. I'm simply widening the definition of 'the self'. From the mind and body, to the universe. But if everyone owns everything, then clearly property rights would not exist as you could not defend your property against it being taken by force from someone.
Quote: from Moridin at 1:15 pm on July 10, 2009 Aimforthehead, do you believe in property rights? Do you believe in self-ownership? If you believe in self-ownership (you do, otherwise you could not use your vocal cords to talk back to me, or in this case, your fingers to type a response), then you must believe that I have the right to the fruits of my labor too, that is, property rights? Do you believe in the principle of non-aggression? That I have the right to not have my body violated by others? If so, how can you not believe in property rights? They are two sides of the same coin. If non-aggression is valid, then i own my body and vice versa. I'm simply widening the definition of 'the self'. From the mind and body, to the universe.
Aimforthehead, do you believe in property rights? Do you believe in self-ownership? If you believe in self-ownership (you do, otherwise you could not use your vocal cords to talk back to me, or in this case, your fingers to type a response), then you must believe that I have the right to the fruits of my labor too, that is, property rights? Do you believe in the principle of non-aggression? That I have the right to not have my body violated by others? If so, how can you not believe in property rights? They are two sides of the same coin. If non-aggression is valid, then i own my body and vice versa.
Do you believe in the principle of non-aggression? That I have the right to not have my body violated by others? If so, how can you not believe in property rights? They are two sides of the same coin. If non-aggression is valid, then i own my body and vice versa.
But if everyone owns everything, then clearly property rights would not exist as you could not defend your property against it being taken by force from someone.
There is no need for property rights to protect your property, as there is no need for property in the first place. That's not to say we won't have things. Houses, computers, etc. Those can be universally distributed, thus there is no basis behind saying there will be theft. For, why would someone steal something that is already free? Surely they couldn't sell it.
For the very small amount of violence and killings that do occur, as I've explained previously, the person who committed such acts will not be cast out, punished, or anything like that. But rather treated as a sick patient. That will be societies job. Quite literally, too. As it is our understanding, when a person kills someone else, that was not an act of fulfilling their nature, but behavior produced by the environment they were in. Thus, it can be fixed. There cannot be authorities as we will be back in the beginning if we did. The transition will however have a limited authority
For the most part however, violence and murder rates will go down to nearly 0%, as unlike now, there will be no basis for such acts.
I reread what I said and I sort of did make it seem like I meant property was part of what causes crime, my mistake >_>
I've answered that same question numerous times. Please refer to the rest of the topic before asking -again-. And no one said having property causes crime... Seriously if you aren't going to pay attention enough to even comprehend the basics of a resource based economy don't bother debating over it.
And no one said having property causes crime... Seriously if you aren't going to pay attention enough to even comprehend the basics of a resource based economy don't bother debating over it.
I will ask until you can answer. If you actually have, link me to that post. How is there crime if there are no laws? And how do you handle people who harm other people if there are no police and no protection?
Quote: from Forever Angel at 4:09 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from Aimforthehead at 10:52 pm on July 10, 2009 =/ Let's try again. By using technology and the methods I mentioned previously, we can reduce crime to a point where laws and thus governments and money are no longer necessary. Decisions will not be made but arrived at by probability. No police, no laws, no protection. Why? Because there is no need for property. The only reasonable flaw in this concept is if an alien force came down to take over the planet. In other words, no one 'controls' them. Which is pretty much what I said...I think everyone else got that =/Now I think you've entered fantasy land. Any valid arguments or just 'that's dumb!'?
Quote: from Aimforthehead at 10:52 pm on July 10, 2009 =/ Let's try again. By using technology and the methods I mentioned previously, we can reduce crime to a point where laws and thus governments and money are no longer necessary. Decisions will not be made but arrived at by probability. No police, no laws, no protection. Why? Because there is no need for property. The only reasonable flaw in this concept is if an alien force came down to take over the planet. In other words, no one 'controls' them. Which is pretty much what I said...I think everyone else got that =/Now I think you've entered fantasy land.
=/ Let's try again. By using technology and the methods I mentioned previously, we can reduce crime to a point where laws and thus governments and money are no longer necessary. Decisions will not be made but arrived at by probability. No police, no laws, no protection. Why? Because there is no need for property. The only reasonable flaw in this concept is if an alien force came down to take over the planet. In other words, no one 'controls' them. Which is pretty much what I said...I think everyone else got that =/
The only reasonable flaw in this concept is if an alien force came down to take over the planet.
In other words, no one 'controls' them. Which is pretty much what I said...I think everyone else got that =/
Quote: from Aimforthehead at 8:51 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from ronpaul691 at 8:49 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from Aimforthehead at 8:43 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from ronpaul691 at 8:40 am on July 11, 2009 A fully automated self replicating robot police force under the control of Skynet will enforce the law freeing up more time for humans to innovate. If you still want to become a police officer, then it's YOUR burden. =/ you know...Livewire does have an age limit of 13... As previously stated, there is no police force, and no laws. Our Star Trek replicators will eliminate the majority of crime by eliminating scarcity and poverty but there will still be the occasional serial killer. That's why my Terminators are needed. Well, that's interesting and all. But I already explained how we would deal with those people :( You can come up with new ideas to though buddy. The Terminators will also protect us from the alien invaders.
Quote: from ronpaul691 at 8:49 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from Aimforthehead at 8:43 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from ronpaul691 at 8:40 am on July 11, 2009 A fully automated self replicating robot police force under the control of Skynet will enforce the law freeing up more time for humans to innovate. If you still want to become a police officer, then it's YOUR burden. =/ you know...Livewire does have an age limit of 13... As previously stated, there is no police force, and no laws. Our Star Trek replicators will eliminate the majority of crime by eliminating scarcity and poverty but there will still be the occasional serial killer. That's why my Terminators are needed. Well, that's interesting and all. But I already explained how we would deal with those people :( You can come up with new ideas to though buddy.
Quote: from Aimforthehead at 8:43 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from ronpaul691 at 8:40 am on July 11, 2009 A fully automated self replicating robot police force under the control of Skynet will enforce the law freeing up more time for humans to innovate. If you still want to become a police officer, then it's YOUR burden. =/ you know...Livewire does have an age limit of 13... As previously stated, there is no police force, and no laws. Our Star Trek replicators will eliminate the majority of crime by eliminating scarcity and poverty but there will still be the occasional serial killer. That's why my Terminators are needed.
Quote: from ronpaul691 at 8:40 am on July 11, 2009 A fully automated self replicating robot police force under the control of Skynet will enforce the law freeing up more time for humans to innovate. If you still want to become a police officer, then it's YOUR burden. =/ you know...Livewire does have an age limit of 13... As previously stated, there is no police force, and no laws.
A fully automated self replicating robot police force under the control of Skynet will enforce the law freeing up more time for humans to innovate. If you still want to become a police officer, then it's YOUR burden.
Our Star Trek replicators will eliminate the majority of crime by eliminating scarcity and poverty but there will still be the occasional serial killer. That's why my Terminators are needed.
The Terminators will also protect us from the alien invaders.
747 users online 
224030 members 1410 active today Advertise Here
747 users online 224030 members 1410 active today Advertise Here
You have 1 new message.
