With the advent of global problems, such as dirty water world wide and people induced climate catastrophes we need global solutions.
Global solutions mean we let go of systems which tended to cause the global dilemmas in the first place.
One of these systems is the money system. With money as a medium for the exchange of goods we have an artifically propped up system where we are now finding business for business sake.
Governments are desperately trying to maintain a system which not only threatens our quality of life but also our very existence.
In order to maintain the system we need growth. This involves growth in population and growth in manufacture.
Do we really need more of everything. Do we really need more people on this overstretched planet. To artifically stimulate our needs we need advertising. Advertising at its best arouses discontentment and it is also causing severe confusion and unhappiness.
People are picking up all sorts of messages from the environment about the dire straights we are in and deep inside them they know what is good for them and nature, i.e. using and taking less but we are being constantly bombarded by very vivid and intruding messages about what the system feels we need to be happy, successful and desireable.
No we do not need more soaps, shampoos, deoderants, cars, hoovers, dishwashers. Just one cleverly designed article of each kind is necessary for our happiness and well-being.
Supporting a system which has had it, is causing an inhumane speeding up of existence but it is a hurrying and indifference which leads nowhere - just to increased stress and increased hurrying.
It is no wonder lots of people, including physisists feel that time as a dimension is running out!
Also the fact we equate everything to a factor which has no inherrent value, i.e. money, reduces the true value of things. Things mainly come from the environment - from nature and it is about time we realised the true cost in environmental and human terms instead of equating everything to a factor of nothing.
Money is a medium which is and will be totally unecessary. It is a medium which is tearing us apart.
The moneyless system would be driven by the real needs of people, rather than artificially created demands, and by a loving and sharing attitude and thirdly by respect for the environment.
People would be better educated and informed than they are now and would no longer be misled by advertising and by the illusions and incentives created by money.
Everyone would be entitled to everything they want but what they want would be over time filtered and adjusted through a careful educational process.
Everyone would be taught to understand the limits of the natural resources and what it takes to have a healthy and sustainable environment.
Everyone would be entitled to the same amount of goods and services, providing they worked well for six hours a day for six days a week. They would be entitled to the same goods and services during any illness or other form of hardship which would prevent them from delivering their customary six hours of work.
The availability of goods during a life-time combined with a good education for women would eliminate the need for poorer families to have many children as is the custom today in many developing or poorer nations. This will reduce the population of the planet, over- population now being the main environmental hazard we have.
Two days of each month by each able bodied adult worker would be used for voluntary work consisting of unpleasant tasks. Children could be encouraged to help within reason to foster their community spirit.
Individuality based community spirit would be encouraged.
Six hours work for six days a week with mothering considered a condition which also gives the woman access to the goods for herself and her children means there would be some reduction in the labour available.
To counteract this I feel it would be essential, before the full introduction of the system occurs, to encourage people to understand their real needs and to dispose of artificially created needs.
One could measure this by initially asking people what they really want – what do they feel would make them happy, then after careful advertising and media campaigning, say after ten years one could again ask people what they feel they need to make them happy. Wanting has got to be analysed for what it is – often a compensatory yearning. In some people, however, buying something or flying somewhere may give them genuine happiness and something they reflect gladly upon.
Present levels of demand and then possibly more demand would not be in line with supply in the new system due to the reduced labour force and a new balance has to be found and maintained.
People would be channelled into suitable work according to their talents and intelligence, at least as much as possible and there would be full employment.
Appropriate accommodation would be available to everyone. However, initially patience would have to be exercised, i.e. until the houses desired have been built.
In my system whereby humans live without money, environmentalists would be the rulers, i.e. people who put the well-being of the planet and its inhabitants first and not their egos.
To further my suggestions on developing a society without money; I suggest that the new economics comes into effect over a period of twenty years with a reduction of all financial factors of five percent per year.
Advantages:
- The system focuses manufacturers and consumers on the real economy rather than
a fictitious economy which is created by money
- bankers who are behind the recent economic crises as a result of their greed and
irresponsible ways of managing and acting are no longer needed
- fair distribution of available goods and services
- appropriate care for the old, sick and needy
- appropriate education for all, e.g. male and female according to ability
- no need to have many children, who are at present needed to care for their aging
parents in countries in which there are no appropriate social security systems
- as a result a dramatic drop in number of children and an end to the intolerable
increase in world population, which would otherwise continue and bring
environmental desaster to all
- much less stress for the planet and for its people
Disadvantages:
- implementation in stages
- competitive forces no longer directly at work
- risk of over-beaurocratic decision processes
- assumption that the better performing individuals would still excel at their jobs
although they wouldl not be rewarded with above average access to goods and
services
- assumption that people would co-operate with the system without excessive
performance monitoring
My idea would be to eliminate money altogether, and create a true value system.
We would work about six hours a day and feed all our needs into a centralised computer system and if there were a thousand or more wishes for an item then the need would be transferred to a suitable producer. The thing would be manufactured and delivered to our vicinity.
We would not be paid for our work but we could all have access to the goods. This has been the basic structure in many societies for aeons. So it's not so new.
Just imagine the whole of society working for the good of the environment and people, with advertisers using all of their skill to truly inform people as to what the earth can sustain and what it can't - helping people to find what really makes them happy - a combined constructive effort, instead of the madness going on today.
Women who have become mothers would hav e life-long access to the goods, leaving it up to the woman whether she went to work or not, and there would be much more provision for working from home.
This would be an ideal solution for the growing automation and computerisation as the more machines took over people would then simply work fewer hours.
Caring and social services and also very unpleasant work would be completed by everyone (except mothers) doing two to three days voluntary work each month.
Education would be available to everyone at any age, and I am sure people would be chanelled into suitable occupations much more than they are today, as profit would not be a consideration.
We would have thriving small industry and small firms, with people taking pride in the things they would produce. We would re-introduce quality and patience and care and respect for humanitry and the earth goods.
There would be a rapid decentralisation without lack of communication and isolation. The loss of centres in society is very dangerous with any collapse causing massive chain reactions and a complete breakdown of infrastructure.
I would suggest competition could be perpetuated in sport and with musical events.
There would be an emphasis on personal responsibility permeating the whole of society.
Supply would be created by demand with people making educated requests. And the incentive to work would be created by people's basic needs having to be satisfied and also the possibility to live in relative luxury if one works conscienciously for six hours for six days a week.
Families would have time and energy for each other and there would be plenty of time for innovative hobbies.
