I've watched much of what Jacque Fresco had to say and read as much as I could tolerate. Money evolved because it is EXTREMELY INCONVENIENT to operate in a barter system and you need a way of communicating subjective value over time and space between people who don't know each other. Money is a useful tool to solve these problems. Sure, other problems arise, but an extended, ordered economy can't exist without money.
Also, economists do scientific experiments all the time to try and decipher why humans and economies act the way they do, and they still largely don't know why economies and societies self organize. So to say that it's all just pseudoscience really does trivialize the good work actual economists do every day to try and understand.
My most serious critique of ideas like Fresco's is that they're arrogant. Anyone who thinks they've got the answer to saving humanity and drums up an ENTIRE ECONOMIC SYSTEM and says "this is the way" is proposing a solution to a problem he can't even name because he doesn't understand how real people operate. All he sees is his vision for others. He's not even asking any questions or proposing experiments. He's just got this amazing plan. Gimme a break.
I love dreamers and idealists, but we have to be willing to examine our ideas when the rubber meets the road, and his ideas are just amazing fantasies, unlike capitalism - read market economies - which actually work and work superbly well considering that billions of people who don't know each other help each other daily in ways they can't understand, peacefully.
Until the Star Trek replicator is up and running, money will always be a thing.
Money WAS useful tool. No one denies it.
It is no longer relevant, obsolete idea considering current scientific understandings and level of technological development.
You seem to be very attached to your monetary economics. That is probably why that was only that much you could tolerate....
Money will always be a thing for someone who cannot think beyond it...
This statement itself is highly ignorant and cognitively and creatively limited. An example of ultimate thinking . "The man will never build a flying machine", "The man will never travel to the moon", etc
So you're argument here is that I'm just highly ignorant and that my thinking is... ultimate? Did you mean limited?
Neither you - nor Mr. Fresco - have cogently articulated why or how money is obsolete, considering that humanity uses it every day to allocate resources. You also haven't demonstrated how we're nearing anything close to a post scarcity world, the precise world that is needed for RBE to function.
Please tell me the irony of using a social network that is essentially built atop cryptographic money isn't lost on you. The very same monetary economics that you haven't actually debunked operate here using similar price signals we experience in the real world. Are you seriously arguing that money is obsolete on a platform that utilizes money as it's very foundation?
On a side note, it reflects poorly on you and your arguments when you stoop to insult the intelligence of your opponents. If you find yourself doing that, perhaps you should rethink your position.
"So you're argument here is that I'm just highly ignorant".
Nowhere I made such generalisation. Do not use strawman fallacy and put words in my mouth I have never said. When I see someone using logical fallacies I find it pointless continuing having a conversation. There is no sense conversing with someone who has no basic understanding of fundamentals of logical discourse.
"Neither you - nor Mr. Fresco - have cogently articulated why or how money is obsolete, considering that humanity uses it every day to allocate resources. You also haven't demonstrated how we're nearing anything close to a post scarcity world, the precise world that is needed for RBE to function."
Most of people still also believe that there is invisible man in heaven or use coal to heat up their houses. It does not kean that these things or ideas are not obsolete.
It seems that you do not understand what "obsolete" means. It means "outdated". Just because something us commonly believed or used does not mean it cannot be obsolete.
"Please tell me the irony of using a social network that is essentially built atop cryptographic money isn't lost on you. The very same monetary economics that you haven't actually debunked operate here using similar price signals we experience in the real world. Are you seriously arguing that money is obsolete on a platform that utilizes money as it's very foundation?"
You have just used another logical fallacy called "appeal to hypocrisy".
Where I share certain information has nothing to do with the subject/message that this information includes.
Besides that you seem clueless about the difference between fiat currency used by the state and cryptocurrency that is not controlled by the state.
I find cryptocurrency to be great technology for transition between monetary system and moneyless RBE system.
That's it. I am done with this conversation. Like I wrote above. There is no sense conversing with someone who has no basic understanding of fundamentals of logical discourse and keep throwing logical fallacies.
''There is no sense conversing with someone who has no basic understanding of fundamentals of logical discourse.''
amen brother
Ha! Okay. You said "This statement itself is highly ignorant and cognitively and creatively limited. An example of ultimate thinking." I can infer from this that you are saying that I am highly ignorant and creatively limited. No normal person would read that sentence and think "oh, he's just talking about some abstract idea." No! You're just using a rhetorical trick to hide the fact that you're being rude. At least I have the gumption to say it straight. You are being rude.
Alas, you still haven't articulated anything. You have demonstrated absolutely nothing. But hats off to you to pointing out a couple of casual fallacies to obscure the fact that you haven't laid out any clear ideas nor actually rebutted any of my arguments. It's amazing.
You must DEMONSTRATE why money is obsolete. You can't just say things like that and expect to get away with it. Show me how money is obsolete. Show me how a RBE will work and why it's actually needed without the shallow rhetoric that usually amounts to the fallacy of an appeal to sympathy. See? I can do it to!
Good day, sir.
"Show me how money is obsolete".
Read about RBE beyond others opinions and you will get how.
"Ha! Okay. You said "This statement itself is highly ignorant and cognitively and creatively limited. An example of ultimate thinking." I can infer from this that you are saying that I am highly ignorant and creatively limited. No normal person would read that sentence and think "oh, he's just talking about some abstract idea." No! You're just using a rhetorical trick to hide the fact that you're being rude. At least I have the gumption to say it straight. You are being rude".
Please, don't cry.
https://steemit.com/life/@knozaki2015/why-we-should-stop-getting-offended-featuring-logic-as-author
You cannot argue with a zealot of scientism:
https://www.aaas.org/page/what-scientism
logic__you're_solid.____Remind's me of a
you're_logic__is solid.__better me.