Page 3 of 7 [ 103 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

smudge
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,716
Location: Moved on

02 Mar 2012, 3:47 pm

Aspie_Chav wrote:
Quite happy to live in a moneyless society. Debit cards are the norm. People even use them for coffee.
I like the idea of Starbucks card. It can be used without a pin number.


I don't. They keep at least £5 of your cash on the card.



Thom_Fuleri
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2010
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 849
Location: Leicestershire, UK

02 Mar 2012, 3:49 pm

Vigilans wrote:
I don't like using my debit card unless I have to. I always try to pay in cash. This also lets you avoid the taxman in some ways. In addition to avoiding any fees the bank may put on you.


Bah! Ninja'd!

Quote:
My debit card has been scammed before; a lot of cashiers at the gas stations or convenience stores here get in on the scams for a bit of the cut. I can't imagine its much different elsewhere.


I think everyone I know has either been the victim of this or knows somehow who has. Cash is anonymous, but you can only steal it once. Cards are cash you can spend repeatedly.



Chipshorter
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 477
Location: The Georgian Quarter of The Pool of Life, The Centre of The Creative Universe

02 Mar 2012, 3:54 pm

There is one thing people haven't picked up on about e-cash (the same can be said for e-voting) there would be a need for very strict intellectual property laws for it work both safely and securely in order to protect illegal copying of currencies.


_________________
Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime. --Potter Stewart
Corruption is authority plus monopoly minus transparency. --Unknown


Last edited by Chipshorter on 02 Mar 2012, 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

02 Mar 2012, 3:55 pm

TM wrote:
I hate the idea, having to pay via electronic transfer just makes you extremely easy to track.
Extremely easy to leave without any resource as well.

Chipshorter wrote:
There is one thing people haven't picked up about e-cash (the same can be said for e-voting) there would be a need for very strict intellectual property laws for it work both safely and securely.

Intellectual property is a propaganda term used by lobbies to group together three things that have nothing alike: copyright, patents and trademarks. You seem to be using it for yet another unrelated idea. Please stop using that term altogether and instead specify what laws do you think would be needed to make e-money work.


_________________
.


Chipshorter
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 477
Location: The Georgian Quarter of The Pool of Life, The Centre of The Creative Universe

02 Mar 2012, 4:10 pm

^^ am talking a guess at a mix of anti-counterfeiting and copyright legislation.


_________________
Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime. --Potter Stewart
Corruption is authority plus monopoly minus transparency. --Unknown


TheKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,100
Location: Merced, California

02 Mar 2012, 7:52 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
donnie_darko wrote:
No way. Some small transactions, like between family members and friends, should be private. As for the excuse of stopping drug crime, prostitution etc, well, they would find other ways to make money, such as precious metal trading and things like that.


If they just made using drugs not a crime then problem solved......but they want to control every transaction everyone makes even people who aren't breaking any laws? All it is an excuse to have even more control over every aspect of peoples lives.


i agree, the purpose of prohibition is to reduce supply and demand, and the government has failed on both accounts, of course in the end its all about money


_________________
WP Strident Atheist
If you believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, have accepted him as your lord and savior, and are 100% proud of it, put this in your sig.


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

02 Mar 2012, 8:07 pm

Maybe if there wasn't so much ancillary crime and stupidity associated with those who use illegal drugs, the restrictions on those drugs could be relaxed, if only a little.

Before anyone makes the fallacious claim that "laws make people do bad things", they should know that people choose to do bad things, and the law is only there to provide a reason to arrest them for doing those bad things.

So if crack-heads would not choose to become violent, if potheads would not choose to get stupid and lazy, and if junkies in general would not choose to act irresponsibly, then maybe those laws would not be necessary.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,138
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

02 Mar 2012, 8:25 pm

You're not very rational about this topic if you think everyone who uses drugs is abusing them, or that drug abuse should be treated as a crime rather than the mental health issue it is.


_________________
Eat the rich, feed the poor. No not literally idiot, cannibalism is gross.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 Mar 2012, 8:53 pm

TheKing wrote:


the monetary system is a modified system of bartering except you trade items with intrinsically no value, except the value the government gives it, for items that have value such as food and entertainment. its still trading one thing for another except in the monetary system what your trading has no real value.

personally i agree with Jacque Fresco's Resource Based Economy, but i also agree with him that its not a viable solution until we are technologically able to switch to that kind of economy


In a full barter system where M goods trade for N goods there are potentially M*N/2 transaction types. In a system where one good becomes the standard trading good they simplifies to (M + N + 1)/2 transaction types. Money is necessary to overcome the combinatorial overhead.

ruveyn



psych
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,488
Location: w london

02 Mar 2012, 10:12 pm

placing an individuals ability to pay for food, heat, shelter under direct, centralised control of government places that person at the complete mercy of the government. If someone dissents their purchasing power can just be switched off. Under these circumstances forget any naive notions about democracy and being able to vote in a 'nice' government because the combination of that type of immense power in the hands of a few and utter vulnerability and dependancy for the many is recipe for totalitarianism. Its the return of slavery.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,138
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

02 Mar 2012, 10:21 pm

psych wrote:
placing an individuals ability to pay for food, heat, shelter under direct, centralised control of government places that person at the complete mercy of the government. If someone dissents their purchasing power can just be switched off. Under these circumstances forget any naive notions about democracy and being able to vote in a 'nice' government because the combination of that type of immense power in the hands of a few and utter vulnerability and dependancy for the many is recipe for totalitarianism. Its the return of slavery.


Very good points.


_________________
Eat the rich, feed the poor. No not literally idiot, cannibalism is gross.


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

02 Mar 2012, 10:22 pm

psych wrote:
placing an individuals ability to pay for food, heat, shelter under direct, centralised control of government places that person at the complete mercy of the government. If someone dissents their purchasing power can just be switched off. Under these circumstances forget any naive notions about democracy and being able to vote in a 'nice' government because the combination of that type of immense power in the hands of a few and utter vulnerability and dependancy for the many is recipe for totalitarianism. Its the return of slavery.


Quite correct.



enrico_dandolo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 866

02 Mar 2012, 10:29 pm

If there were no cash, people would trade for illegal things in nature. Buy a new watch on your debit card, trade new watch for drugs, the end.

As for the currency debate... Having "no money" is ineffectual. The fact that there was no convenient way to count one's total wealth never stopped people being wealthy. One can be wealthy in tons of grain and in acres of land, you can be wealthy in cattle, in ship, in slaves, in amphoras of olive oil, in salted cods, it is all the same as in dollars, and it doesn't stop one from being more powerful than others.

Fnord wrote:
Before anyone makes the fallacious claim that "laws make people do bad things", they should know that people choose to do bad things, and the law is only there to provide a reason to arrest them for doing those bad things.

People choose to do things. Some laws decide that what people already did is bad.

Actually, most laws just define a general framework so everyone can go on with their business. Most attempts to "change" society by merely changing laws have failed, unless society had changed before the law.



Last edited by enrico_dandolo on 02 Mar 2012, 10:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

02 Mar 2012, 10:31 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
TM wrote:
I hate the idea, having to pay via electronic transfer just makes you extremely easy to track.
Extremely easy to leave without any resource as well.

Chipshorter wrote:
There is one thing people haven't picked up about e-cash (the same can be said for e-voting) there would be a need for very strict intellectual property laws for it work both safely and securely.

Intellectual property is a propaganda term used by lobbies to group together three things that have nothing alike: copyright, patents and trademarks. You seem to be using it for yet another unrelated idea. Please stop using that term altogether and instead specify what laws do you think would be needed to make e-money work.
So what's the difference between all those terms? I hear them used interchangeably an awful lot and I've always wondered why.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,138
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

02 Mar 2012, 10:34 pm

enrico_dandolo wrote:
If there were no cash, people would trade for illegal things in nature. Buy a new watch on your debit card, trade new watch for drugs, the end.

Fnord wrote:
Before anyone makes the fallacious claim that "laws make people do bad things", they should know that people choose to do bad things, and the law is only there to provide a reason to arrest them for doing those bad things.

People choose to do things. Some laws decide that what people already did is bad.

Actually, most laws just define a general framework so everyone can go on with their business. Most attempts to "change" society by merely changing laws have failed, unless society had changed before the law.


Sometimes those that make the laws try very hard to prevent society from changing by categorizing any deviants who dare challenge things as criminals and refusing to look at information contrary to the information their laws are based on. some of their laws should be changed.


_________________
Eat the rich, feed the poor. No not literally idiot, cannibalism is gross.


AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

03 Mar 2012, 11:16 am

enrico_dandolo wrote:
If there were no cash, people would trade for illegal things in nature. Buy a new watch on your debit card, trade new watch for drugs, the end.

As for the currency debate... Having "no money" is ineffectual. The fact that there was no convenient way to count one's total wealth never stopped people being wealthy. One can be wealthy in tons of grain and in acres of land, you can be wealthy in cattle, in ship, in slaves, in amphoras of olive oil, in salted cods, it is all the same as in dollars, and it doesn't stop one from being more powerful than others.

Fnord wrote:
Before anyone makes the fallacious claim that "laws make people do bad things", they should know that people choose to do bad things, and the law is only there to provide a reason to arrest them for doing those bad things.

People choose to do things. Some laws decide that what people already did is bad.

Actually, most laws just define a general framework so everyone can go on with their business. Most attempts to "change" society by merely changing laws have failed, unless society had changed before the law.
I'm 100% with you. Getting rid of one manifestation of currency doesn't get rid of currency altogether and laws usually reflect society rather than the other way around.