Resource Based economy

[BradMillner46]

The incredibly ironic thing is because of technological advances, within just 1 years time, we could dramatically change the face of the Earth for the better. We would eradicate hunger, war and poverty from the face of the planet and  dramatically raise the quality of life and for virtually every person on Earth (unless you're psychotic and enjoy living in the cesspool of a world that we have now.) All it would take is just 1 years time.......  

 

[The Mage]

2 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

The incredibly ironic thing is because of technological advances, within just 1 years time, we could dramatically change the face of the Earth for the better. We would eradicate hunger, war and poverty from the face of the planet and  dramatically raise the quality of life and for virtually every person on Earth (unless you're psychotic and enjoy living in the cesspool of a world that we have now.) All it would take is just 1 years time.......  

 

Wow, that was just horrible.

She has absolutely no idea of how money works. (Unfortunately, few do.) Not once does she point out, (and is probably unaware,) that poverty and hunger has plunged worldwide over the last couple of decades. I mean this is a big success story, and all because of capitalism. Not donations, not urban planning, or government intervention, but capitalism.

She starts off by attempting to create fear. Your job will be taken away by automation. Funny this was the same argument from the late 1800’s, when the fear was machines taking jobs away from people. But it took the menial tasks away, and created many new jobs. I remember the exact same fears being spread around about computers in the 80’s. Now there are millions employed to manage all those computers.

This talk is just a rehash of the 1898 idea of Garden Cities. With just a little update to make it look like it a modern technological idea. But we do in fact have garden cities. They were built, and did not ever stand up to the ideals, and in fact there are quite a few complaints that they hurt economies, and made things more difficult. It was found the design was quite inefficient. They helped to create ghetto communities.

Didn’t she quote Einstein’s definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result, and yet that is exactly what she is proposing with this revamp of a Garden City.  (Oh, and Einstein never actually said that.)

She also brings up the horrible, and ecologically bad idea of locally grown crops.   There are reasons why a cactus is not planted in a swamp, and rice isn’t grown in a desert.

This is socialism, once again repackaged into yet another shiny new box. Another attempt at a Utopia. But it is still the same thing. The idea that some certain group is smarter than everyone else, and therefore should make all decisions for the “inferior” people. This time the scientists are the ones who will make the rules, or at least the approved scientists. The ones who accept the collective.

Look at Venezuela. Everyone who understands socialism expected the current problems. It happened in the USSR and China. 2 things saved those countries. The massive drop in population due to starvation, (and WWII) and the re-introduction of capitalism. (Black market in the USSR, and China, although they attempt to limit, and control it, allowed capitalism back into their country.

Oh, and there is no way to build all this crap in a year.

[BradMillner46]

58 minutes ago, The Mage said:

Wow, that was just horrible.

 

 

She has absolutely no idea of how money works. (Unfortunately, few do.) Not once does she point out, (and is probably unaware,) that poverty and hunger has plunged worldwide over the last couple of decades. I mean this is a big success story, and all because of capitalism. Not donations, not urban planning, or government intervention, but capitalism.

 

 

She starts off by attempting to create fear. Your job will be taken away by automation. Funny this was the same argument from the late 1800’s, when the fear was machines taking jobs away from people. But it took the menial tasks away, and created many new jobs. I remember the exact same fears being spread around about computers in the 80’s. Now there are millions employed to manage all those computers.

 

 

This talk is just a rehash of the 1898 idea of Garden Cities. With just a little update to make it look like it a modern technological idea. But we do in fact have garden cities. They were built, and did not ever stand up to the ideals, and in fact there are quite a few complaints that they hurt economies, and made things more difficult. It was found the design was quite inefficient. They helped to create ghetto communities.

 

 

Didn’t she quote Einstein’s definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result, and yet that is exactly what she is proposing with this revamp of a Garden City.  (Oh, and Einstein never actually said that.)

 

 

She also brings up the horrible, and ecologically bad idea of locally grown crops.   There are reasons why a cactus is not planted in a swamp, and rice isn’t grown in a desert.

 

 

This is socialism, once again repackaged into yet another shiny new box. Another attempt at a Utopia. But it is still the same thing. The idea that some certain group is smarter than everyone else, and therefore should make all decisions for the “inferior” people. This time the scientists are the ones who will make the rules, or at least the approved scientists. The ones who accept the collective.

 

 

Look at Venezuela. Everyone who understands socialism expected the current problems. It happened in the USSR and China. 2 things saved those countries. The massive drop in population due to starvation, (and WWII) and the re-introduction of capitalism. (Black market in the USSR, and China, although they attempt to limit, and control it, allowed capitalism back into their country.

 

Oh, and there is no way to build all this crap in a year.

 

There are many assumptions you've made which are completely untrue, but I'll address perhaps the most important assumption that most people have about the Resource Based Economy.....That is if you don't want to be a part of it then you don't have to, it's entirely voluntary based. If it were mandatory then it would cease to be a Resource Based Economy. It is also entirely possible to have a world where both the Resource Based Economy and Capitalism coexist peacefully. Our very strong belief though is that as Capitalism continues it's never-ending collapse, the incentive will be so great to join the RBE and have a FAR better quality of life that virtually everyone living inside of the Capitalist system will leave to go join the RBE. The only people who will choose to stay behind will be the ones who are completely delusional at that point. 

I'd also like to point out that the ONLY thing that keeps you right now from becoming an all-out advocate FOR the Resource Based Economy is you losing your current income stream and not being able to get another income stream. If you lose your ability to function in this current system then your mindset will change very, very quickly, especially when offered a FAR better choice. I know we haven't gotten there yet and I know it's pretty easy to scoff at right now but just wait and see. Trust me, you wait and see.

[The Mage]

33 minutes ago, BradMillner46 said:

There are many assumptions you've made which are completely untrue, but I'll address perhaps the most important assumption that most people have about the Resource Based Economy.....That is if you don't want to be a part of it then you don't have to, it's entirely voluntary based. If it were mandatory then it would cease to be a Resource Based Economy. It is also entirely possible to have a world where both the Resource Based Economy and Capitalism coexist peacefully. Our very strong belief though is that as Capitalism continues it's never-ending collapse, the incentive will be so great to join the RBE and have a FAR better quality of life that virtually everyone living inside of the Capitalist system will leave to go join the RBE. The only people who will choose to stay behind will be the ones who are completely delusional at that point. 

I'd also like to point out that the ONLY thing that keeps you right now from becoming an all-out advocate FOR the Resource Based Economy is you losing your current income stream and not being able to get another income stream. If you lose your ability to function in this current system then your mindset will change very, very quickly, especially when offered a FAR better choice. I know we haven't gotten there yet and I know it's pretty easy to scoff at right now but just wait and see. Trust me, you wait and see.

Will it actually be by choice, or not? I didn't hear anything about it being optional.

I have suggested repeatedly to socialists that they choose what I call a "capitalist socialism". Where people choose to be part of a commune group. They simply put all their resources into the common pot, and, probably by contract, they decide, or have it decided for them, how those resources are distributed. They can work in the capitalist system, contributing their resources to their group, or they can work within the system themselves. As long as this is a voluntary system, I have no problem with it.

But that is not what she advocated. She talked about the elimination of money. The elimination of borders. (Globalism.)

Point out exactly where in the video that she states this is voluntary. 

Now as far as my income stream, not currently rich. (I would shut down both the donations, and google ads if that was the case.) But I am building my income streams. A little from vending, that has been shrinking, a little from my Duplex, (my best source,) a little from stocks, some babysitting, (interestingly enough,) and a little from online sources. If you can count, that is 5 sources. My previous employer has asked me to come back, and I am weighing that option, but I have been working hard to not have a job. I know others who do the same thing. Many here are vending for that purpose. Each machine is it's own stream of income.

The Venus Project (that you tried to spam us with before,)  states the following: "The Venus Project proposes we work toward a worldwide, resource-based economy, a holistic social and economic system in which the planetary resources are held as the common heritage of all the earth’s inhabitants." Is this voluntary? It sure doesn't sound like it to me. The only way to get all the resources is to take them. The only way to take them all is through military means. Just like Lenin did, just like Mao did, just like Hugo Chavez, and that mass murderer Castro did.

If the system worked, it would have worked in these dictators countries. They all did it, and it failed, as it always does. North Korea stays afloat by extortion. Every few years they make threats until the west gives them money.

All these things fall into the scarcity mentality. That there are only a "limited" amount of resources, and only by taking from the rich, and giving to the Government... uh I mean the people, then all will be well. Anyone remember peak oil? We are supposed to be out of it, and yet governments are passing laws to prevent the extraction. Texas just found 20 billion barrels of oil in shale. People are fighting against pipelines because it is somehow more environmentally friendly to send oil by trucks and trains than by gravity.

Your idea is exactly how America got started. The first colony didn't use money. All the resources were put into a common storage, and distributed equally. And surprise surprise, it failed. People starved and died. But then somebody in charge said, "If you don't work, you don't eat." Suddenly when their socialism was removed, they not only produced enough to live off of, they produced enough to export. This is history here. 

Again, make it voluntary, and I don't have a problem with it. Just don't force me into it, which is the standard motto. (Obamacare, Socialist Security, Medicare... all working perfectly right?)

[BradMillner46]

1 hour ago, The Mage said:

Will it actually be by choice, or not? I didn't hear anything about it being optional.

I have suggested repeatedly to socialists that they choose what I call a "capitalist socialism". Where people choose to be part of a commune group. They simply put all their resources into the common pot, and, probably by contract, they decide, or have it decided for them, how those resources are distributed. They can work in the capitalist system, contributing their resources to their group, or they can work within the system themselves. As long as this is a voluntary system, I have no problem with it.

But that is not what she advocated. She talked about the elimination of money. The elimination of borders. (Globalism.)

Point out exactly where in the video that she states this is voluntary. 

Now as far as my income stream, not currently rich. (I would shut down both the donations, and google ads if that was the case.) But I am building my income streams. A little from vending, that has been shrinking, a little from my Duplex, (my best source,) a little from stocks, some babysitting, (interestingly enough,) and a little from online sources. If you can count, that is 5 sources. My previous employer has asked me to come back, and I am weighing that option, but I have been working hard to not have a job. I know others who do the same thing. Many here are vending for that purpose. Each machine is it's own stream of income.

The Venus Project (that you tried to spam us with before,)  states the following: "The Venus Project proposes we work toward a worldwide, resource-based economy, a holistic social and economic system in which the planetary resources are held as the common heritage of all the earth’s inhabitants." Is this voluntary? It sure doesn't sound like it to me. The only way to get all the resources is to take them. The only way to take them all is through military means. Just like Lenin did, just like Mao did, just like Hugo Chavez, and that mass murderer Castro did.

If the system worked, it would have worked in these dictators countries. They all did it, and it failed, as it always does. North Korea stays afloat by extortion. Every few years they make threats until the west gives them money.

All these things fall into the scarcity mentality. That there are only a "limited" amount of resources, and only by taking from the rich, and giving to the Government... uh I mean the people, then all will be well. Anyone remember peak oil? We are supposed to be out of it, and yet governments are passing laws to prevent the extraction. Texas just found 20 billion barrels of oil in shale. People are fighting against pipelines because it is somehow more environmentally friendly to send oil by trucks and trains than by gravity.

Your idea is exactly how America got started. The first colony didn't use money. All the resources were put into a common storage, and distributed equally. And surprise surprise, it failed. People starved and died. But then somebody in charge said, "If you don't work, you don't eat." Suddenly when their socialism was removed, they not only produced enough to live off of, they produced enough to export. This is history here. 

Again, make it voluntary, and I don't have a problem with it. Just don't force me into it, which is the standard motto. (Obamacare, Socialist Security, Medicare... all working perfectly right?)

Like I said, the Resource based Economy is, by definition, entirely voluntary. Simply put, the Resource Based Economy means applying the real scientific method for social concern and global sustainability. This is something that humanity either does or it doesn't do. 

My simple question for you is, what solutions do you have to offer? You completely avoided the issue of technological unemployment by basically saying that it isn't happening. However, how much real study have you ever put into this topic? Saying that it isn't happening because you don't want it to happen is not a basis for any kind of logical argument. Simply trying to discard this as fiction and nonsense doesn't make this go away either. The fact is, some of the best scientists at some of the top universities in the world have studied this for years and have peer reviewed studies to support their claim that technology is most definitely replacing human jobs at a rapidly accelerating rate and I think this short video, clearly defines and bolsters this claim...

 

And I believe it's very fair to say that these scientists know a whole lot more about this than you do when you've never even studied this before. If you think you somehow know more than them, I think that would be similar to you saying that you could take on the Chicago Bulls by yourself in basketball and mop the floor with them and I don't even think it would take common sense to figure out what would happen.

So my very simple question to you is, what solutions do you have to offer to the masses of people on the planet that would effectively deal with this that would not erupt into all-out global civil war?

[The Mage]

5 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

Like I said, the Resource based Economy is, by definition, entirely voluntary. Simply put, the Resource Based Economy means applying the real scientific method for social concern and global sustainability. This is something that humanity either does or it doesn't do. 

And as I said, as long as only people who voluntarily decide to engage in this, then I don't have a problem with it.

The question is what are we defining as science? People too often confuse hard science with social science. 1+1 always equals 2, but social science does not have the absolutes that a hard science does. When science is up to interpretation, it is of risk of becoming politics, not science.

5 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

My simple question for you is, what solutions do you have to offer? You completely avoided the issue of technological unemployment by basically saying that it isn't happening. However, how much real study have you ever put into this topic? Saying that it isn't happening because you don't want it to happen is not a basis for any kind of logical argument. Simply trying to discard this as fiction and nonsense doesn't make this go away either. The fact is, some of the best scientists at some of the top universities in the world have studied this for years and have peer reviewed studies to support their claim that technology is most definitely replacing human jobs at a rapidly accelerating rate and I think this short video, clearly defines and bolsters this claim...

 

And I believe it's very fair to say that these scientists know a whole lot more about this than you do when you've never even studied this before. If you think you somehow know more than them, I think that would be similar to you saying that you could take on the Chicago Bulls by yourself in basketball and mop the floor with them and I don't even think it would take common sense to figure out what would happen.

Congratulations. Your argument is essentially, “We’re smart, your dumb, so I win.”

If you can quit being so condescending, I was thinking of this in the early 90’s. And I recognized the same things that happened in the industrial revolution, the computer revolution, and every single advance that occurred between and after.

Yes, there are differences, but there were differences between the industrial, and the beginning of the computer revolution. And the exact same arguments are being made. The same fears are there as there were, and the same fearmongering.

Unlike what the video stated, we are not horses. They didn’t lose their jobs, as the poorly designed metaphor he used tried to say. As much as PETA hates it, they were the product. They were used for their “horsepower”, and that was it. Humans are the purpose of our economy. The reason it exists. It never existed for the horses. 

But yes, this is a different change than has been seen before. I never once said it is not happening, I just see it differently than you do. My mother was a secretary all through the 70’s. The idea that she would become a computer operator managing data never occurred to her. The idea was ludicrous.

The same is true of what is coming up. The problem is people are trying to play Nostradamus here, when there is no way to see the future. Sure we can get ideas, and make conjecture, but there will be changes that nobody will be able to see coming. 

You are looking at this with an industrial age mind, not an information age one. You want a solution, quit looking at it through the lens of jobs. (Not to mention the lens of resources.)

Here is a great example. I have a friend that makes Larry The Cable Guy look sophisticated. He spent the major part of his life woodworking, and as he got older, all those years took a toll on his nervous system. His doctors forbid him from doing the work he loved to do, and his main source of income. His “job” was gone. But instead of sitting around feeling sorry for himself, he hopped on the computer, and began researching ways to make money. He sells stuff through amazon, sold software, and found multiple ways to make money online. All without any normal job.

5 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

So my very simple question to you is, what solutions do you have to offer to the masses of people on the planet that would effectively deal with this that would not erupt into all-out global civil war?

I do not fear this future. Life isn't a Mad Max movie, or a Terminator movie. Godzilla isn't going to climb out of the water and crush our cities. Everything you are talking about sounds more like a movie than reality. And quite a dystopian one.

I prefer to believe in Michio Kaku's thought of the coming abundance. MRI machines used to cost $3 million, (technology was a big cause of the upswing in medical costs over the past couple decades.) And last I checked, you can buy one for $50K.

It took billions, and a decade to sequence the genome. And now I found a service that will do it for $374. (Black Friday Special. Yes, a Black Friday special on sequencing your genome, though it is limited to the exome for obvious reasons.) Although if you just want it limited to ancestry, you can do that for $99.

You want to talk about resources. Companies are already working on plans to mine in space. What will happen to the cost of resources when we start mining the solar system?

But again, if you are looking for that solution, information age thinking. People are stuck on the idea of working for money. (Or in your philosophy, resources.) But what if your income was independent of the work you do? The thing people seem to forget is that the job isn’t what’s important to my survival, the income is what’s important. Getting the money to flow to you. That’s what’s important.

But there could still be war. People are out there spreading fear, and panic, and fostering hate. They are shown a problem that my never exist, and that fear results in people acting out. People fearing, blaming, and hating others.

[BradMillner46]

2 hours ago, The Mage said:

And as I said, as long as only people who voluntarily decide to engage in this, then I don't have a problem with it.

The question is what are we defining as science? People too often confuse hard science with social science. 1+1 always equals 2, but social science does not have the absolutes that a hard science does. When science is up to interpretation, it is of risk of becoming politics, not science.

Congratulations. Your argument is essentially, “We’re smart, your dumb, so I win.”

 

 

If you can quit being so condescending, I was thinking of this in the early 90’s. And I recognized the same things that happened in the industrial revolution, the computer revolution, and every single advance that occurred between and after.

 

 

Yes, there are differences, but there were differences between the industrial, and the beginning of the computer revolution. And the exact same arguments are being made. The same fears are there as there were, and the same fearmongering.

 

 

Unlike what the video stated, we are not horses. They didn’t lose their jobs, as the poorly designed metaphor he used tried to say. As much as PETA hates it, they were the product. They were used for their “horsepower”, and that was it. Humans are the purpose of our economy. The reason it exists. It never existed for the horses. 

 

 

But yes, this is a different change than has been seen before. I never once said it is not happening, I just see it differently than you do. My mother was a secretary all through the 70’s. The idea that she would become a computer operator managing data never occurred to her. The idea was ludicrous.

 

 

The same is true of what is coming up. The problem is people are trying to play Nostradamus here, when there is no way to see the future. Sure we can get ideas, and make conjecture, but there will be changes that nobody will be able to see coming. 

 

 

You are looking at this with an industrial age mind, not an information age one. You want a solution, quit looking at it through the lens of jobs. (Not to mention the lens of resources.)

 

 

Here is a great example. I have a friend that makes Larry The Cable Guy look sophisticated. He spent the major part of his life woodworking, and as he got older, all those years took a toll on his nervous system. His doctors forbid him from doing the work he loved to do, and his main source of income. His “job” was gone. But instead of sitting around feeling sorry for himself, he hopped on the computer, and began researching ways to make money. He sells stuff through amazon, sold software, and found multiple ways to make money online. All without any normal job.

 

 

I do not fear this future. Life isn't a Mad Max movie, or a Terminator movie. Godzilla isn't going to climb out of the water and crush our cities. Everything you are talking about sounds more like a movie than reality. And quite a dystopian one.

I prefer to believe in Michio Kaku's thought of the coming abundance. MRI machines used to cost $3 million, (technology was a big cause of the upswing in medical costs over the past couple decades.) And last I checked, you can buy one for $50K.

It took billions, and a decade to sequence the genome. And now I found a service that will do it for $374. (Black Friday Special. Yes, a Black Friday special on sequencing your genome, though it is limited to the exome for obvious reasons.) Although if you just want it limited to ancestry, you can do that for $99.

You want to talk about resources. Companies are already working on plans to mine in space. What will happen to the cost of resources when we start mining the solar system?

But again, if you are looking for that solution, information age thinking. People are stuck on the idea of working for money. (Or in your philosophy, resources.) But what if your income was independent of the work you do? The thing people seem to forget is that the job isn’t what’s important to my survival, the income is what’s important. Getting the money to flow to you. That’s what’s important.

But there could still be war. People are out there spreading fear, and panic, and fostering hate. They are shown a problem that my never exist, and that fear results in people acting out. People fearing, blaming, and hating others.

So putting everything in a nutshell, what you are saying is that technological unemployment is a myth and that you know more than the top scientists in the world know about it. So what proof do you have to back up your claims about this? If you're going to discard information, especially peer reviewed scientific research, then it is absolutely critical for you to back up your own claims with factual data which is pertinent to the situation at hand and not just mere semantics (such as the notion that technology doesn't replace jobs, it only adds jobs.) Otherwise, you are only showing your cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is stress that you experience when exposed to truth that falls outside of what you want to believe in. 

You said I am being condescending to you. It is not my intention to be condescending, I'm merely pointing out what the truth is and you are choosing to see that what I am saying is condescending to you. It is also not the intention of the scientists who have complied years and years of peer reviewed research on this topic to say "See!!!! I told you so!!!" Their intention is to point out what the truth is. If you can't (or won't) open up your mind then what's the point of anyone ever having a real conversation with you? You've accused science, which has brought forth this new realization, of being fearful but I think in all truth, it's you who is stuck in fear.

What could ever possibly be wrong with you and I and everyone else living in a highly technological society where, the means of production is done through automation, all of our basic needs are met and we are all TRULY free to do with our time however we choose and follow our passions and dreams in life? What would be wrong with living in a world where no one starves to death and poverty and war have been eradicated from the Earth?

I've asked you this several times now....What solutions do you have to offer? I know that you don't want to believe that technological unemployment is our new reality and the video I posted above is not true but what if it is true? What solutions do you have to offer? 

 

[lacanteen]

Setting aside my hash pipe and tin foil hat, this sounds like fear mongering to me. I am 55 years old and use technology much more than most men my age. My job depends on me to apply technology to make this company successful. Our investments in pre-kitting and credit card telemetry has made the difference this past year as the oil patch has slowed and businesses in our area close. Our YTD sales are down, but our YTD expenses are down 3 points more!

 

Sure I can fix 1980s models A/P and National machines and they will continue to make money. Unless these machines utilize 2016 technologies they will just continue to make 1980s revenues. That mantra is also what makes this country great. You can be a successful as you dare to be. Is a drug dealer not successful? Only if he isn't caught. As long as grass needs cut, tomatoes need picked, steel needs to be made, ore needs to be mined, tires need to be changed, ditches need to be dug, software needs to be written, and people need to be entertained, someone has to, manage, pay for, or actually do all of this work. It's called the economy. (did I mention I have business degrees?)

 

As a bonus question, explain this sentence to me:

Quote

Simply put, the Resource Based Economy means applying the real scientific method for social concern and global sustainability.

Reads like a bullet point on an Amway brochure to me, but that's just my opinion, yet another freedom that makes this country great.

[BradMillner46]

Again, taking into account that the top rated scientists in the world might just know what they are talking about when it comes to Technological Unemployment and you all who have never studied this before don't, what solutions do you have to offer?

 

All I want to do is give you all my lending ear here. What solutions do you all have to offer that would effectively deal with the issue of Technological Unemployment?

And if you need some more proof, here's one of the top rated scientists in the world giving a TED Talk about it... 

 

[lacanteen]

I am a studied economist and can say with certainty that the concept of supply and demand has been the engine driving free civilizations for centuries. The hard workers in a free society will only work hard for their own interests.

 

So what exactly does this mean? I am not watching a propaganda video. Give me your words.

Quote

Simply put, the Resource Based Economy means applying the real scientific method for social concern and global sustainability.

 

 

[moondog]

On 11/29/2016 at 7:35 AM, lacanteen said:

I am a studied economist and can say with certainty that the concept of supply and demand has been the engine driving free civilizations for centuries. The hard workers in a free society will only work hard for their own interests.

 

So what exactly does this mean? I am not watching a propaganda video. Give me your words.

 

 

Don't you just love how people that have never done an honest day of work in their entire lives become recognized as experts on the issue? 

[The Mage]

7 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

So putting everything in a nutshell, what you are saying is that technological unemployment is a myth and that you know more than the top scientists in the world know about it.

No, I am not saying "technological unemployment" is a myth. I even gave examples of it.

But exactly when did you become the mouthpiece of the scientific community. You argue like the people who think they speak for God, and any disagreement against them means you are disagreeing with God.  Except instead of God, you are using the Scientific community.

I’ve seen this tactic before. You act like everything you say is gospel, but I must prove every work I utter, and even then, it will be treated like blasphemy.

I am debating you, not the entire scientific community, so please stop acting like I am.

7 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

So what proof do you have to back up your claims about this? If you're going to discard information, especially peer reviewed scientific research, then it is absolutely critical for you to back up your own claims with factual data which is pertinent to the situation at hand and not just mere semantics (such as the notion that technology doesn't replace jobs, it only adds jobs.) Otherwise, you are only showing your cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is stress that you experience when exposed to truth that falls outside of what you want to believe in. 

And here is where you are acting like I am blaspheming. (And no, that's not cognitive dissonance.)

Anyway, where is this peer reviewed scientific research you keep talking about. You have not produced a single link to any scientific paper, and yet are demanding that I back up everything I say. A way to avoid arguing, while acting like you are arguing.

(You know, I once had a person try to convince me that I wasn’t allowed to disagree with him until I read a 1 gigabyte research file, and completely debunked everything in it.)

The thing is you are the one making claims. But not realizing these are just the conjectures of these “scientists”. Even if they have peer reviewed papers does not mean they are correct. If you know how science works, you should know that a paper is published, and other scientists review it, tear it apart, and critique it.

There are plenty of published papers that have been debunked and discredited. For example, a recent paper showed in increase in heart disease with the use of testosterone replacement therapy. Lawyers jumped on that trying to sue the pharmaceutical companies. But it doesn’t match the hundred or so papers showing the opposite benefits, and the scientists who looked into it found the flaws in their research. (Though it didn’t stop the shyster lawyers.)

And again, my claim is not that there won’t be job losses, but that we are experiencing an economic shift. A fundamental change in the way things work, or at least in the way society will have to deal with the way things work.

8 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

You said I am being condescending to you. It is not my intention to be condescending, I'm merely pointing out what the truth is and you are choosing to see that what I am saying is condescending to you.

Your condescension comes from how you are acting in this discussion. In just this statement, you are stating that you are the holder of truth. You have acted like any disagreement with your dogma must be a sign of ignorance, and lack of intelligence. 

8 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

It is also not the intention of the scientists who have complied years and years of peer reviewed research on this topic to say "See!!!! I told you so!!!" Their intention is to point out what the truth is. If you can't (or won't) open up your mind then what's the point of anyone ever having a real conversation with you? You've accused science, which has brought forth this new realization, of being fearful but I think in all truth, it's you who is stuck in fear.

And here. I am not disagreeing with you, or your interpretation, I am disagreeing with science. All of science. You act as if everything you are saying is 100% truth, verified, and not a single iota can be disagreed with, but I have the closed mind. (And when I am not fully disagreeing with what is being said, that you seem to gloss over repeatedly.)

Also, I did not ever accuse science of being fearful. (Science is not a being with emotions.) I am accusing you, and the person in the first video, of fearmongering. 

Also, what exactly am I saying that is fearful? I said for the most part everything will be fine, for most people, especially if they learn the lessons I have. You are the one presenting the doom and gloom, but then call me fearful.

[Hold on, I seem to be unable to add more quotes.]

---- Break---

[lacanteen]

This thread is becoming more like a Jehovah's Witness visit. I'm not buying what he's selling but somehow I'm the one missing out.

[The Mage]

8 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

What could ever possibly be wrong with you and I and everyone else living in a highly technological society where, the means of production is done through automation, all of our basic needs are met and we are all TRULY free to do with our time however we choose and follow our passions and dreams in life? What would be wrong with living in a world where no one starves to death and poverty and war have been eradicated from the Earth?

Nothing is wrong with that, although you are talking about complete fantasy. Where is your proof? Where has this been created? We only have thoughts and ideas, many of which have already failed. I know you want to call it science, and act like it is something new, but it is socialism, pure and simple. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Isn’t this what you are proposing? This is communism. The fantasy that his killed more people in the USSR than the Nazi’s, and even more in China.  

9 hours ago, BradMillner46 said:

I've asked you this several times now....What solutions do you have to offer? I know that you don't want to believe that technological unemployment is our new reality and the video I posted above is not true but what if it is true? What solutions do you have to offer? 

Again, I never said “technological unemployment” wasn’t going to happen. I just don’t see it as the doom and gloom event you do.

If you read what I said, while I didn’t go into detail, I did in fact give a solution. So many people are leaving normal employment. They are doing something else. They are making money in many old and new ways. You are stuck on the idea of the job, and that is the only way you can think. You are stuck with the idea of a 40-hour work week, 2 weeks off a year, and eventual retirement with subsistence living.

No, there is another way. There has been another way forever. I am currently working toward that different way, and it’s working. I know people who are dumping the idea of jobs, and creating their own incomes.

You are busy looking at the jobs being lost because of all that automation and technology. But not once have you ever thought what if you bought that technology? What if you rented it? Why can’t you be the owner making money off it instead of the employee losing his job?

[The Mage]

17 minutes ago, lacanteen said:

This thread is becoming more like a Jehovah's Witness visit. I'm not buying what he's selling but somehow I'm the one missing out.

I'm a Blainologist myself.

[BradMillner46]

14 hours ago, The Mage said:

Nothing is wrong with that, although you are talking about complete fantasy. Where is your proof? Where has this been created? We only have thoughts and ideas, many of which have already failed. I know you want to call it science, and act like it is something new, but it is socialism, pure and simple. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Isn’t this what you are proposing? This is communism. The fantasy that his killed more people in the USSR than the Nazi’s, and even more in China.  

 

 

Again, I never said “technological unemployment” wasn’t going to happen. I just don’t see it as the doom and gloom event you do.

If you read what I said, while I didn’t go into detail, I did in fact give a solution. So many people are leaving normal employment. They are doing something else. They are making money in many old and new ways. You are stuck on the idea of the job, and that is the only way you can think. You are stuck with the idea of a 40-hour work week, 2 weeks off a year, and eventual retirement with subsistence living.

No, there is another way. There has been another way forever. I am currently working toward that different way, and it’s working. I know people who are dumping the idea of jobs, and creating their own incomes.

You are busy looking at the jobs being lost because of all that automation and technology. But not once have you ever thought what if you bought that technology? What if you rented it? Why can’t you be the owner making money off it instead of the employee losing his job?

 

[BradMillner46]

It seems that all of you are saying that I'm "fear mongering." This is to any other person who might stumble upon this post who has even half an ounce of reason and common sense (if there are even any on this forum).....

For them to say that I am fear mongering is ABSOLUTELY FALSE and here's why..... Rising unemployment, coupled with the movement into a true Resource Based Economy, as far as I and anyone else who advocate for the Resource Based Economy are concerned, is something to CELEBRATE because it means more people are truly freed from their jobs that they hate and free to explore their passions and dreams in life. Therefore, how is ANYTHING of what I've been saying fear mongering? Also, how is running away from reality (extensive research and peer reviewed studies which PROVE that technology is replacing human jobs at a rapidly accelerating rate and that these jobs ARE NOT coming back) is not only ignorance but fear mongering in itself? Since when does running away from truth mean that you're not afraid? I see all of this as ENORMOUS potential to create an AMAZING new world where poverty, hunger and war are eradicated from the Earth and we are TRULY free to do whatever we want with our time and follow our passions and dreams in life and they want to say that what I am saying is fear mongering?? How does that even make any sense???

I have asked these people many, MANY times and even begged them to provide ANY SOLUTIONS to deal with this very real and proven issue of Technological Unemployment. Needless to say, NONE of them have provided ANY solutions for ANY of this. If you go back through all of the posts on this topic, their ONLY response is to say that they, having NEVER STUDIED Technological Unemployment before in their lives, know more than the top scientists in the world do at the most prestigious universities in the world such as M.I.T., Cal-Tech and Stanford.

Who should we trust, some of the smartest people on the planet who have YEARS of research with this, or Mr. Average  "Joe" and "Bob" from vendiscuss.net who run their own little Ma and Pa vending business whose daily tasks are restocking their machines and using 3rd grade level math to keep track of their little businesses? And if you say we should trust these "Joe's" and "Bob's" who know what they're talking about, then you need have your head examined immediately.  

I think that making this post is permanent, pending that the administrator, "The Mage" doesn't again censor what I'm saying here. He's already deleted several posts I've made regarding the Resource Based Economy while he censors no posts from other people which many would find racist and highly offensive. It's obvious to me that new ideas and information intimidate him so he shuts down and becomes defensive (like all the rest of the "Joe's" and "Bob's" on here do as well.)

Anyway, I hope that this post stays permanent because I'm going to make a prediction here that HOPEFULLY will stay up for many years to come..........The jobs are going out, they're going out very quickly and they are NEVER coming back. To those of you who are die-hard Donald Trump supporters who believe what he says about bringing back jobs, you're in for an awakening. NOTHING of what Donald Trump  proposes address ANY of the real cause of job loss. The reason why most people voted for Trump isn't because they're racist (they're not) it's because they're angry about the economy and the fact that the social system (the "free" market monetary system) is very quickly squeezing people out due to the reality of Technological Unemployment (and they have every right to feel that way.) That's why Trump was able to win in the Rust Belt States where it is unheard of for Republicans to win - It happened because the first jobs to go out are the manufacturing jobs that are being replaced, right now through automation. The factories in these states are still operating and in fact are producing WAY MORE than they ever have, but if you go visit these factories there's one thing you're going to find very little of - people working there.

Also, don't get me wrong because I certainly do not support  Hillary or ANY of the other politicians or ANY form of government for that matter, period. In a Resource Based Economy, there is no government or anyone forcing you to do anything simply because it isn't needed. The purpose of a government is for the allocation and distribution of resources to the masses, hopefully in a fair way. In a Resource Based Economy, all goods are in abundance and available for everyone due to the ENORMOUS power of new technologies such as 3D Printing and Supply/Demand Tracking Systems (which places like Amazon.com are already using.) Those of you who have made comments about what you think would be vast inefficiencies regarding technological capabilities are utterly clueless when it comes to the real power of modern day technology. It doesn't matter if you're in your 50's or older and think that somehow makes you smarter than others. That just makes you an old, ignorant dinosaur who is on your way out.

 Many of you have said that the Resource Based Economy is "communism" and "socialism" as if there would be a re-emergence of the Iron Curtain on steroids (i.e. "The New World Order.") This, by definition, would NOT be a Resource Based Economy anymore than the United States is considered a real democracy. If the powers that be decided to implement something like Agenda 21 then I would be as opposed to that (if not more) than the rest of you. Like I said, that is NOT what a Resource Based Economy is and that is most definitely NOT what I advocate for. The only way that anyone is going to understand this is by letting go of your childish fears and choosing instead to open your mind to the potential of creating a better world. Those Average "Joe's" and "Bob's" who are highly resistant to this will be looked back on among generations to come as the clowns they were who never provided any solutions and just remained miserable and fearful about everything and everyone around them.

 

[The Mage]

When you tell people jobs are going away, and never coming back, that is fearmongering. Especially when you tell everyone the only solution is yours.

And your solution is exactly communism. If you ever looked at it, socialism is supposed to be the structure that everyone is forced into, and then once everything runs smoothly, it is supposed to seamlessly fall away, leaving a communist utopia without any government. (Step 1. Underpants  Step 2. ????  Step 3. Profit)

But communism is where everyone works together is some magical community for the common good, without money, or government, where all resources are distributed to all for the benefit of all. You are describing this with modern technology.

Our current unemployment is not a result of technology right now. There are plenty of jobs, and there are an amazing number of jobs that are not being filled because they can't find the trained people.

There are people who do not look for work. Not because there are not the jobs, but because they are waiting for your utopia. They were raised to think that they were to be taken care of by Big Brother, and that they are supposed to be given stuff.

You asked for a solution, but why do you ignore mine? I've given it twice now, but then you still say nobody will give you a solution.

And since you brought it up, if I was trying to censor you, I would have blocked you, and your now 7 profiles. I am being nice here, since I did put a temporary suspension on one of your profiles, (not actually a ban,) but I am still allowing your posts here, even with requests that I ban you. (Mostly for being a golpher.) There were 2 reasons I put the other profile on temporary suspension. You were posting the same thing in multiple places, which is spam, and then after being told to keep your political posts in the off topic section, you attempted an end run by doing an end run around me, and posting the same political rant that I had just moved. Then your post was really attacking people, though somewhat indirectly. It was a combination of factors, but spamming was the worst. Political or not, spamming is not allowed.

Also you don't seem to get that we don't allow multiple profiles here. Not to mention that it's another attempted end run around any suspension. 

It didn't help that when I attempted to get more information from you for your first post under this profile, making sure it wasn't just spam, you laid into me pretty hard, which I laughed about, but worse calling another member a racist. (And still haven't provided any of the requested examples.) If that was on the forum, you would have been banned.

I will not block political opinion. Although if I catch you creating another profile you will be banned. 

[BradMillner46]

4 hours ago, The Mage said:

When you tell people jobs are going away, and never coming back, that is fearmongering. Especially when you tell everyone the only solution is yours.

And your solution is exactly communism. If you ever looked at it, socialism is supposed to be the structure that everyone is forced into, and then once everything runs smoothly, it is supposed to seamlessly fall away, leaving a communist utopia without any government. (Step 1. Underpants  Step 2. ????  Step 3. Profit)

But communism is where everyone works together is some magical community for the common good, without money, or government, where all resources are distributed to all for the benefit of all. You are describing this with modern technology.

Our current unemployment is not a result of technology right now. There are plenty of jobs, and there are an amazing number of jobs that are not being filled because they can't find the trained people.

There are people who do not look for work. Not because there are not the jobs, but because they are waiting for your utopia. They were raised to think that they were to be taken care of by Big Brother, and that they are supposed to be given stuff.

You asked for a solution, but why do you ignore mine? I've given it twice now, but then you still say nobody will give you a solution.

And since you brought it up, if I was trying to censor you, I would have blocked you, and your now 7 profiles. I am being nice here, since I did put a temporary suspension on one of your profiles, (not actually a ban,) but I am still allowing your posts here, even with requests that I ban you. (Mostly for being a golpher.) There were 2 reasons I put the other profile on temporary suspension. You were posting the same thing in multiple places, which is spam, and then after being told to keep your political posts in the off topic section, you attempted an end run by doing an end run around me, and posting the same political rant that I had just moved. Then your post was really attacking people, though somewhat indirectly. It was a combination of factors, but spamming was the worst. Political or not, spamming is not allowed.

Also you don't seem to get that we don't allow multiple profiles here. Not to mention that it's another attempted end run around any suspension. 

It didn't help that when I attempted to get more information from you for your first post under this profile, making sure it wasn't just spam, you laid into me pretty hard, which I laughed about, but worse calling another member a racist. (And still haven't provided any of the requested examples.) If that was on the forum, you would have been banned.

I will not block political opinion. Although if I catch you creating another profile you will be banned. 

This is ridiculous. You have provided NO solutions and only said that you, Mr "Average Bob" vendor on vendiscuss.net whose daily tasks include the incredible cognitive ability of restocking your machines and using no more than 3rd grade level math to keep track of your business is an expert on Technological Unemployment and that the real scientists who have written peer reviewed studies on this know nothing.

Only the people who understand and accept the RBE are more evolved and we're more evolved because we're willing to let go of our childish fears of other people, develop a real concern for others outside of our own self interests and accept new ideas and information that emerge.

There were a whole group of people who could not make the last transition from the prehistoric world into our modern world today and they all live in remote parts of the Earth. They too were not willing to let go of their fear either and the result was that these people have remained incredibly primitive, with many of these tribes never even discovering fire yet!

So again, just for the record, my prediction is that the jobs will continue their rapid, accelerating exodus and are not ever coming back. Those people who supported Donald Trump thinking that he will bring back the jobs are in for an awakening. Nothing of what he (or any other politician for that matter) says or proposes will stop this from happening because it is impossible to stop technology. I am not saying this out of fear, I am saying this out of great hope for the potential for a FAR better world for everyone and I personally, very much so, look forward to the future.  

[The Mage]

Your argument style is obvious here. Instead of actually discussing any of this, you sidestep everything, twist my words and meaning, and then proceed to attack my intelligence. It's an old style of arguing that actually demonstrates that you unable to successfully debate the subject, so you sidestep. You attempt to change the subject to be about me. The hope is that me emotional response will cause me to follow your change, and attempt to defend myself. Instead it tells me that if a debate is something to be won, then that person must be loosing. When they resort to name calling and rude language, they have lost completely. 

The result her is that you come off as elitist. Acting like you know better, and are superior to others. People who disagree with you are "less evolved", and "fearful", and focused on their "self interest". 

Instead of actually stating anything, you just bring up all the scientists and the papers they have written, without once mentioning one of those papers. Maybe bringing up a Ted Talk, which is a great format, but still isn't science. One person talking, no review, or analysis. 

Also with your condescending comments about vending, why exactly are you here? If you don't like it, and think it is a field for dolts, you really need to question your urge to keep creating profiles and post here.

But that does bring up the thought, who exactly is going to fire the vendors here? Our boss? Oh wait, we don't have bosses, we are the boss. I sure as hell ain't going to fire myself. Gee, what happens if my job is automated? Since I'm the boss, I must be the one who is automating it. Now the robot is doing my job, making me money while I sit at home playing my Xbox, or out getting more locations. Oh wait, I'll have another robot for that, won't I?

But still Vending is not the solution I was talking about. It's a piece, and an option for many people, and an example of it. But it's bigger than that. It is the 4 other sources of income I have that you seem to have glossed over in your attempt to attack me. It's in the 2 more that I'm currently working on creating.

I'm also positive about the future, but not because I'm waiting for the magical commie robots to come save me.

In my future, I'm in charge, and the robots are my slaves. In yours, it's practically the opposite, and you had better hope the algorithm never finds that eliminating you would be a logical choice.

Now I will wait for your response which will be, "Because science... But they have published papers... You didn't study this and I know because... Uh, yeah, science... You can't argue because you're inferior, and less evolved... Oh yeah, science. "

[BradMillner46]

I forgot to say this in my last post so I'll say it now.....

These Billy Bob vendors from vendiscuss.net have accused me of "fear mongering."

SINCE WHEN DOES TELLING THE TRUTH MAKE SOMEONE A FEAR MONGER???????

The bottom line is these Billy Bob's are going to have an INCREASINGLY difficult time attempting to impose what they think reality is onto others as we move into the very near future. Because they can ONLY see reality from their EXCEPTIONALLY LIMITED perspectives, it's not going to make much or even any sense to them.

Our entire system (the "free" market monetary system) has to have ENOUGH jobs in which to satisfy the masses. So even if there are a FEW jobs that are created, that doesn't matter because without jobs for the overall basis for our economy, the system not only becomes obsolete but highly destructive.

Here's more strong evidence of a collapsing economy. This guy just drives around filming empty storefronts and urban blight and you can find thousands of other videos on Youtube just like this.....

 

[lacanteen]

I think this is where we are supposed to shave our heads and drink the red tea. Every post becomes more desperately cultist.

[BradMillner46]

Pathetic.

[BradMillner46]

To any person with even half an ounce of reason and common sense who may stumble upon this post some time in the future....

 

What contribution do these back wood country bumpkins ever make? Other than (most of them) being heavily steeped in fundamental religion, criticizing other people for their own outside-the-box concepts and ideas, being so damn fearful of anybody whose different than they are that MOST of them have to hire a damn locator (LOL), what do they do? They can't even make good money running a vending business. 

I'm ready to live in a better place and I would be willing to trade all of my money and everything I own to do it instead of living in this Jerry Springer ignorant freak show that we live in.

[lacanteen]