Comment: Why don't people get it?

(See in situ)


Why don't people get it?

Before you downvote this, please read to the end. I'm not promoting anything that's not free market, libertarian based.

I just don't understand why people here can't grasp this concept. This is not socialism because the computer is not telling anyone what they should or should not have. It's not telling what they can or can't have. It's only telling them WHAT'S IN TOO SHORT OF SUPPLY FOR THEM TO HAVE. That's all. It's not socialist to simply know what resources the planet has left.

If you all had done your homework, you would know that this will not lead to rationing but rather in the other direction. With a global mindset of resource awareness, there won't be any incentive to use up that last bit of some rare metal because it's cheaper than using a larger amount of regular steel. The steel will win every time because the rare metal will be seen as, well... rare. How is this so hard to understand?

With that new direction of efficiency winning out over profit, the resources we have are more than enough for sustained living by even the highest populations the planet is expected to hold.

Sure, in the Zeitgeist movies, Jacques Fresco routinely advocates that 'they' will build the cities for us and 'they' will do so in the most efficient manner and 'they' will (fill in the rest). But he does not own the RBE concept, nor does Peter Joseph. The concept has many supporters from non-related groups. From those groups, there is a general thinking that the world would really not change that much except for the use of money. Replacing it would be what can best be described as 'peer pressure'. Over time, this pressure would re-train people into considering their peers instead of their pocketbook. Isn't this how a close knit family works now? Most of the time, no money changes hands for favors, loans, charity or any other interaction. Why can't society learn to do the same?

Most will answer that with, "Because money is scarce." But the truth is that without banker manipulations, money (e.g. wealth stored from human productivity) will stockpile so high so fast that it will almost lose it's importance. If you disagree, please show your math because the number do support this. The question then becomes, "What would things look like if everyone could become a millionaire by working less than a decade?"