Cyprus woes

[dawiw]

http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/23/news/ec ... ?hpt=hp_t2

I cannot imagine if that would happen in the US.

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Would happen?  It already did, in the 1930s.

"Turn in your gold for notes.  Trade rate is $20/oz.  Good, all traded?  Trade rate is $35/oz."

[Sal1981]

Unable to restore trust in its banks and with an economy locked in a downward spiral, social and political unrest would escalate quickly. At that point, Cyprus may decide it has no option but to abandon the euro and start printing its own currency.

When will people realize that money isn't the solution?

[NitzWalsh]

Unable to restore trust in its banks and with an economy locked in a downward spiral, social and political unrest would escalate quickly. At that point, Cyprus may decide it has no option but to abandon the euro and start printing its own currency.

When will people realize that money isn't the solution?

Probably when stuff stops costing money.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Maybe they'll stop being the Russian mafia's defacto money laundry..

[Jason78]

I cannot imagine if that would happen in the US.

In the US they'd probably tax the crap out of you and then just hand the money over to the banks and the auto industry.

[the_antithesis]

So, what has Miley gotten herself into this time?

[Sal1981]

Unable to restore trust in its banks and with an economy locked in a downward spiral, social and political unrest would escalate quickly. At that point, Cyprus may decide it has no option but to abandon the euro and start printing its own currency.

When will people realize that money isn't the solution?

Probably when stuff stops costing money.

Good then, replace money with energy certificates, and take it from there.

[DunkleSeele]

Good then, replace money with energy certificates, and take it from there.

You've just given money a fancy name.

[Plu]

When will people realize that money isn't the solution?

Probably some point after the collapse of society.

You've just given money a fancy name.

I think there's more behind it than a renaming, at least from the last time I saw him post about it. There are many ways to implement a management of resources. Our current one stems from ancient time. It's not all that bizarre to imagine it might be outdated by now. Hell; it's older than the bible and look how wrong that is.

[Sal1981]

Good then, replace money with energy certificates, and take it from there.

You've just given money a fancy name.

It's an aspect of Technocracy. Energy certificates (or credits) is based on a calculation of net energy available divided by the number of people; and each person is given this amount of credits equally (or could be less socialistic, and instead be divided by energy expenditure, such that a couch potato would get less than, say, an electrical engineer, but whatever).

Basically it has 2 main features; the first feature is that energy certificates come with an expiration date, so hoarding of energy certificates (analogous to hoarding of money) becomes pointless, could be annual, such that after being issued your share in the available energy, you have to spend it before it expires a year later, since energy isn't some tangible thing, but just what we use (water, food, electricity, etc.) and produce(work, power plants, crop yields, etc.). 2nd feature is that is assigned to a specific person, so stealing credits (barring identity theft or whatever) becomes difficult.

It's not a perfect system, but it's damn more viable than having 1% of the population owning more than half the wealth, leaving the majority fighting over scraps.

[DunkleSeele]

Good then, replace money with energy certificates, and take it from there.

You've just given money a fancy name.

It's an aspect of Technocracy. Energy certificates (or credits) is based on a calculation of net energy available divided by the number of people; and each person is given this amount of credits equally (or could be less socialistic, and instead be divided by energy expenditure, such that a couch potato would get less than, say, an electrical engineer, but whatever).

What do you mean by "net energy"? And why would an electrical engineer automatically spend more energy than a couch potato?

Basically it has 2 main features; the first feature is that energy certificates come with an expiration date, so hoarding of energy certificates (analogous to hoarding of money) becomes pointless, could be annual, such that after being issued your share in the available energy, you have to spend it before it expires a year later, since energy isn't some tangible thing, but just what we use (water, food, electricity, etc.) and produce(work, power plants, crop yields, etc.).

But it could cause hoarding of goods. Same thing as hoarding money, really, apart from the amount of space taken.

2nd feature is that is assigned to a specific person, so stealing credits (barring identity theft or whatever) becomes difficult.

Ah, but once you spend your credit it must be transferred to someone, right? Just like money.

It's not a perfect system, but it's damn more viable than having 1% of the population owning more than half the wealth, leaving the majority fighting over scraps.

Not only it's not a perfect system, it's even worse than another completely idiotic system like the "Venus project", with which your pipedream shares some concepts.

Hint: the problem isn't "money", it's "greed" and "power".

[DunkleSeele]

When will people realize that money isn't the solution?

Probably some point after the collapse of society.

You've just given money a fancy name.

I think there's more behind it than a renaming, at least from the last time I saw him post about it. There are many ways to implement a management of resources. Our current one stems from ancient time. It's not all that bizarre to imagine it might be outdated by now. Hell; it's older than the bible and look how wrong that is.

Mangement of resources and money are two completely different topics.

[Plu]

Mangement of resources and money are two completely different topics.

Well yes, but originally money was supposed to be a measure of resource. They aren't anymore, which is kinda the problem.

[Sal1981]

You've just given money a fancy name.

It's an aspect of Technocracy. Energy certificates (or credits) is based on a calculation of net energy available divided by the number of people; and each person is given this amount of credits equally (or could be less socialistic, and instead be divided by energy expenditure, such that a couch potato would get less than, say, an electrical engineer, but whatever).

What do you mean by "net energy"? And why would an electrical engineer automatically spend more energy than a couch potato?

Net energy is merely gross energy minus energy used; better to call it surplus energy. And it's not strictly about spending, but expenditure, i.e. a couch potato has done less to deserve their share in of the energy available than an electrical engineer. That was just an example for "each to his needs; each to his input". But I think the energy should be socialistically divided up.

Basically it has 2 main features; the first feature is that energy certificates come with an expiration date, so hoarding of energy certificates (analogous to hoarding of money) becomes pointless, could be annual, such that after being issued your share in the available energy, you have to spend it before it expires a year later, since energy isn't some tangible thing, but just what we use (water, food, electricity, etc.) and produce(work, power plants, crop yields, etc.).

But it could cause hoarding of goods. Same thing as hoarding money, really, apart from the amount of space taken.

That's an imperfection, which Technocracy answers: You don't own anything at all, neither does the State except calculate and manage the energy necessary. It's about the principles about ownership and how those are applied, it would basically be about energy necessary for you to sustain yourself, which would be covered by the energy certificate. No ownership necessary, not even land or borders (except towards those nations who would want to recognize political borders).

If you're thinking of the classical meaning, basically the State would own everything, shared with its entire populace, but this isn't strictly analogous with Technocracy's vision of ownership. You would still have possessions like a car or computer, those are just possessions. It would do away with the whole idea of one person owning agricultural land and building a golf course because he would be like "fuck all of ya'll, I'll do whatever I want", it would elevate such petty squabbles of ownership and rights to ownership to who used the land most efficiently in terms of energy, evaluated by the State.

2nd feature is that is assigned to a specific person, so stealing credits (barring identity theft or whatever) becomes difficult.

Ah, but once you spend your credit it must be transferred to someone, right? Just like money.

You're still thinking in terms of money; money just changes hands, energy certificates is about genuinely using energy, be it the energy necessary to light a light-bulb, the energy necessary to transport a goods from a field or factory to your house, and so on.

It's not a perfect system, but it's damn more viable than having 1% of the population owning more than half the wealth, leaving the majority fighting over scraps.

Not only it's not a perfect system, it's even worse than another completely idiotic system like the "Venus project", with which your pipedream shares some concepts.

Hint: the problem isn't "money", it's "greed" and "power".

"Greed" and "power" are scapegoats. They are surmountable.

Money only works for small out-dated system of bartering and savings, it doesn't work for a global economy. We have an energy-dependent economy now driven by resources available. It's like using one hammer for building a skyscraper.