Posted by Kazper at 2:15pm Nov 23 '08That which everyone, or almost everyone, uses in a society and that needs maintenance so needs money is paid for by the members of the socitety. The determined amount needed for a year is divided by all members of the society that work and make money.
Members of the society can propose projects to the society and if the majority agrees the amount needed for the project is divided by all members of the society that work and make money.
The projects could be one time things or things that require maintenance.
Members could decide to put a cap on the total amount of money each pays in a year, so that one shot projects may be delayed to the next year or long term projects could be cancelled or scaled back to make room for new ones.
Money essentially represents products and services. If everyone were to counterfeit money instead of creating or doing something to earn it there would be no products or services. The same could happen if everyone were given money without having to create or do anything. If only some counterfeit money or get it for nothing the above wont happen but there'll be a lack of products and services and... I don't know. I can't really explain.
...Ah. If many counterfeit they're increasing the money supply and they can offer more for a product or service than someone else and they could end up raising prices. So prices of products and services could be raised while at the same time the products and services could be getting used up and not replaced since counterfeit money doesn't represent anything.
A cool idea might be an economic system that's independent of any society that is responsible for the creation of money and for enforcing the rules necessary to ensure that what's determined fair is kept fair.
Any individual or small group of individuals or whole societies could partake in the system. Picture a small society on their own planet. They have no economic system of their own, because they don't really need it, but at times enter the system and provide some products or services to make some money to then get some other products or services.
This seems like a democracy but I don't think it is. Those who run the system don't enforce any rules but those that allow the system to function. The system is not a society, it's a system that various societies can take part in.
The system authorities can claim the right to prevent or reverse any usage of the sytem that will, or has a high probability to, fundamentally change or collapse the system. Any activities outside the system are excluded. I'm referring to a company trying to monopolize (if a monopoly has been determined to be a restricted thing).
When thinking of one of my society ideas that I occasionally think about I thought of this because this particular society would be much more loosely governed with really only a limited shared morality and a... common... goal. Though members could trade with eachother they wouldn't have their own economic system (too involved for this fairly loose conglomeration). I initially saw them using some other particular society's economic system so that they could get various goods and services when they wanted (much more and better then they could produce given the nature of their society).
If a society breaks some rules and force is required to stop them other societies who partake in the sytem could be shown the proof and they could join together to bring the violateer into line, so that the system which allws them all to benefit can survive and continue to provide benefits.
Symmetry may be more beautiful (may) but often times may be less practical and much more constraining.
I'm tired of fighting the same battle of symmetry as order versus asymmetry as chaos. Why is that that is symmetrical order and that that is asymmetrical chaos?!
Form follows function and no matter how asymmetrical the resulting form it must not attempt to... "correct" itself by interfering with function.
There is so much more freedom in asymmetry. So much more.
Orders of unorder are the best for they even allow for orders of orders within.
I am driven crazy and to exhaustion from time to time from weird and annoying battles.
'An order of unorder is the best order because new things can be added at any time and in any place.'
~Shawn Savoie~
~Ottawa, Ontario, Canada~
Members of the society can propose projects to the society and if the majority agrees the amount needed for the project is divided by all members of the society that work and make money.
The projects could be one time things or things that require maintenance.
Members could decide to put a cap on the total amount of money each pays in a year, so that one shot projects may be delayed to the next year or long term projects could be cancelled or scaled back to make room for new ones.
Money essentially represents products and services. If everyone were to counterfeit money instead of creating or doing something to earn it there would be no products or services. The same could happen if everyone were given money without having to create or do anything. If only some counterfeit money or get it for nothing the above wont happen but there'll be a lack of products and services and... I don't know. I can't really explain.
...Ah. If many counterfeit they're increasing the money supply and they can offer more for a product or service than someone else and they could end up raising prices. So prices of products and services could be raised while at the same time the products and services could be getting used up and not replaced since counterfeit money doesn't represent anything.
A cool idea might be an economic system that's independent of any society that is responsible for the creation of money and for enforcing the rules necessary to ensure that what's determined fair is kept fair.
Any individual or small group of individuals or whole societies could partake in the system. Picture a small society on their own planet. They have no economic system of their own, because they don't really need it, but at times enter the system and provide some products or services to make some money to then get some other products or services.
This seems like a democracy but I don't think it is. Those who run the system don't enforce any rules but those that allow the system to function. The system is not a society, it's a system that various societies can take part in.
The system authorities can claim the right to prevent or reverse any usage of the sytem that will, or has a high probability to, fundamentally change or collapse the system. Any activities outside the system are excluded. I'm referring to a company trying to monopolize (if a monopoly has been determined to be a restricted thing).
When thinking of one of my society ideas that I occasionally think about I thought of this because this particular society would be much more loosely governed with really only a limited shared morality and a... common... goal. Though members could trade with eachother they wouldn't have their own economic system (too involved for this fairly loose conglomeration). I initially saw them using some other particular society's economic system so that they could get various goods and services when they wanted (much more and better then they could produce given the nature of their society).
If a society breaks some rules and force is required to stop them other societies who partake in the sytem could be shown the proof and they could join together to bring the violateer into line, so that the system which allws them all to benefit can survive and continue to provide benefits.
Symmetry may be more beautiful (may) but often times may be less practical and much more constraining.
I'm tired of fighting the same battle of symmetry as order versus asymmetry as chaos. Why is that that is symmetrical order and that that is asymmetrical chaos?!
Form follows function and no matter how asymmetrical the resulting form it must not attempt to... "correct" itself by interfering with function.
There is so much more freedom in asymmetry. So much more.
Orders of unorder are the best for they even allow for orders of orders within.
I am driven crazy and to exhaustion from time to time from weird and annoying battles.
'An order of unorder is the best order because new things can be added at any time and in any place.'
~Shawn Savoie~
~Ottawa, Ontario, Canada~