-Competition breeds monopolies/cartels
That's an opinion. You can read, for example, The machinery of freedom to know another one.
That's an opinion. You can read, for example, The machinery of freedom to know another one.
No, it's not an opinion. It is the very design of competition, you always end up with an oligopoly or a cartel. The anarcho-capitalist faith is a blind belief in a supernatural force that has no relevance with the physical reality. Like believing in Santa.
Quote
-Lobbying
Is it a problem of money or of the state?
Is it a problem of money or of the state?
In a monetary, profit based state, the two are closely interrelated, so it' doesn't make much difference.
Quote
-All laws must be interpreted
And ones are easier to interpret than others. I think the more objectives the laws the better. That's why private property is a good idea.
And ones are easier to interpret than others. I think the more objectives the laws the better. That's why private property is a good idea.
We are not discussing whether people should have private property or not. Private property is allowed in an RBE, it just becomes meaningless for most things, when you have access to them. It's way more efficient and convenient to have integrated systems that provide services, instead of useless redundancies that produce many negative retroactions.
Quote
"Distribution of energy would be self-evident"
Seriously?
Seriously?
If you apply the scientific method, yes.
What else do you propose? Free market? That inevitably brings slavery and subjugation of the majority in favour of a small elite.
Quote
"Arriving at decisions, not making them"
Again, science can't tell you what to do. Not even engineering, because goals are not provided.
You make decisions to attain certain aims.
Ethics is not a science. Hedonism can't be proven right or wrong.
Again, science can't tell you what to do. Not even engineering, because goals are not provided.
You make decisions to attain certain aims.
Ethics is not a science. Hedonism can't be proven right or wrong.
I explain this clearly in the video, but very briefly: once you agree on what is the desired result, you follow a scientific process to arrive at the best decision.
There is no clash whatsoever and no need to confuse ethics and science. You decide what you want to achieve, and then you apply the scientific method to do it.
Instead, what do you propose to do?
Quote
"...to achieve peak efficiency of our resources..."
There's no efficiency in resources, the efficiency is in the use of resources to fulfill certain task.
There's no efficiency in resources, the efficiency is in the use of resources to fulfill certain task.
It's obviously "usage of", it was misspoken. Come on, you can be better than that.
Quote
"What do people need?
[...]
water and food
[...]
Desalinization and Hydroponic agriculture"
Why not collecting rain water and permaculture?
Is that part of the movement?
[...]
water and food
[...]
Desalinization and Hydroponic agriculture"
Why not collecting rain water and permaculture?
Is that part of the movement?
Whatever works best will be utilised. These are just some suggestions.
Quote
Also, what happens with population? If the survey of optimal food production can't feed the expected population, how population is going to be controlled?
What women would have access to motherhood?
What women would have access to motherhood?
That is a very difficult issue. The best way to approach it with education, forced measures are unacceptable.
In any case, it's a problem that we will have to face soon in the current infinite growth and wasteful paradigm, but we may never have to face it in a system that is focused on peak efficiency and strategic conservation.
So, applying an RBE will, if anything, greatly reduce a problem. Keeping the current system will result in an inevitable collapse, either of the population or of the environment, or both.
Since this is a movement that advocates peace, we would prefer the former.
Quote
"...artificial scarcity..."
But there's no natural scarcity?
But there's no natural scarcity?
Sure, that's why we need strategic conservation, instead of wasteful infinite growth and a throw away society.
Quote
"...freeing the human labor force..."
The cornucopia.
The cornucopia.
Don't project into it. Again, it's "greatly reduced until the system finds its balance" bla bla bla, is there really a need to explain this every single time?
Quote
"the free market leads to planned obsolescence"
It's possible with monopolies and cartels.
It's possible with monopolies and cartels.
Quote
Government :
resource management
production management"
and this is not communism?
resource management
production management"
and this is not communism?
You assumption is wrong. It's not the "government", each ecosystem find its balance according to its carrying capacity, the outdated ideas of "government" and such do not apply.
Quote
"increase social evolution"
Where does directed scientifically evolution goes?
Also isn't uniformity bad for evolution?
Where does directed scientifically evolution goes?
Also isn't uniformity bad for evolution?
Sure, in fat, we advocate biodiversity and dynamic equilibrium, not uniformity and statism.
Quote
Greatly reduced with full transparency and Open Source approach to "governance".
And, in any case, do you see any other solution?
You have to understand that this is not the perfect system we advocate. We see lots of mistakes and inefficiencies, we try to come up with solution. If a new, better solution comes up, we integrate it. So, instead of keep repeating "this is not perfect", why don't you propose something that works better?
Quote
"Their rewards are the fruits of the society as a whole...self interest becomes integrated with social interest...everything is for the greater good"
This certainly sounds like a religion. Not one that is for diversity.
This certainly sounds like a religion. Not one that is for diversity.
?
The recognition that your self interest can also be the interest of others is a religion?
Quote
"power is maintained by ignorance"
So we should build more public schools?
So we should build more public schools?
Are you playing dumb or is that a real question?
Quote
"innovative buildings"
But wait, is what you build today going to be innovative in 10 years?
But wait, is what you build today going to be innovative in 10 years?
If you design things to be easily upgraded, they will always be up to date.
Quote
"you won't steal things because you can't sell them"
No thieves in Cuba nor the URSS.
No thieves in Cuba nor the URSS.
Those places have nothing to do with an RBE. Nothing. It's just in you mind.
Quote
"TZM: we are the activist communication arm of the venus project"
Oh, now I know what is what
Oh, now I know what is what
That video was prior to the split, as I already explained, we split up for good a few months ago.
Quote
"...hopefully the logical spread of greater forms of central planning..."
That sounds like communism to me because I've read too much 1984.
That sounds like communism to me because I've read too much 1984.
No, that sounds like communism to you because you live in the 19th century and you haven't studied systems theory.
Leaving that aside, let me ask you something: given that we already surpassed the carrying capacity of the Earth and that we are effectively destroy the very nature from which we depend on, what do you propose we should do to ensure that we find an equilibrium with nature, so that we can survive as a species without resorting to mass killings?
TZM advocates using the best method available. If you can come up with something better, and you can prove it, we'll advocate that. it's as simple as that. The farthest you can be from a religion, a faith or a cult.
A believer in free market, communism, capitalism, socialism or any other -ism is much more "religious" or "cult-ish" than any of us.