The Zeitgeist Movement: Any questions?

Post Reply New Topic

Hey there guys, I'm soon gonna be hosting a radioshow on Blogtalkradio.com for The Zeitgeist Movement and I am looking to build a list of questions that I will answer on air concerning a Resource-based Economy and how we get from where we are today, to there.

I was hoping you would have any questions for me. Anything at all regarding what values we have, how they relate to our survival, what The Zeitgeist Movement & The Venus Project is about, and how we will survive the impending economic collapse.

For those who have stringently opposed me on this matter, I would gladly take your questions into consideration as well.

Adam.

Would like to see your show begin to discuss a systematic layered approach to solving core issues.

Example, food scarcity is a solvable problem. Discuss the specific steps that need pass to achieve on the desired result.

Encourage your guests to do the same.

Well my show is gonna be a Q&A first and foremost. I have no guests, or plans to have guests, since I plan to merely offer an extension onto the movement's radio shows that exist already. Besides, I don't know exactly what I can do and what I can't do as a host with a free membership.

Would you like to structure your post as a question? Coz I don't have a question in my preliminary list that touches on this.

Sounds good;

Here's the same as a question:

"In addition to the on-going activism & spreading of awareness, what specific steps should we initiate first to best realize an RBE?"

Related questions: "what to focus on first? on food? on water? on shelter? on something else?"

The above intends to focus on practical, actionable steps, rather than sweeping statements like "we need food automation!"... saying, "Yes we do, but what is a 1st step to go from here to there?"

that sort of thing

Post the link once you're set up at BTR and I'll look to contribute during the show!

Good luck!

Fantastic. I really appreciate this. I'll definately incorporate this into my questions.

And if anyone else has any questions, feel free to send them my way.

What do you mean by resource-based economy? Our economic system has resources that are allocated mainly through the concept of private property.

@NeantHumain
Summary here: www . thevenusproject . com / a-new-social-design/resource-based-economy
(remove spaces)

You know this about Alex Jones?

http://www.madcowprod.com/MC6812004.html

What The Venus Project aims to acheive, and hense what The Zeitgeist Movement condones has nothing to do with Alex Jones, or anything that Alex Jones talks about.

It really isn't worth the hassle. Adam-Anti-Um isn't very knowledgeable in standard economic theory.

I was wondering when you would chime in with your negative ad-hominem rhetoric. Obvioulsy my knowledge of economics has come from a different train of thought from your own. Maybe you haven't considered that. And besides, a resource-based economy is completely different from any model of economics we have ever conceived of before, or had before, thus relegating your supposition of my lack of economic knowledge as an ad-hominem attack.

So come on dude, if you really feel confident, pose a question to me that is really gonna test my knowledge. And keep in mind I'm not here to argue economics, I have posted this thread to ask if people would be prepared to give me questions that I will answer on my radio show.

Do you have any questions for me? Put your money where your mouth is, so to speak. Either that, or say you don't wanna waste your time and don't post anymore.

@Awesomelyglorius
Sorry, but what are you trying to accomplish by denouncing the efforts of a fellow community member?

Instead of trying to get others to dismiss Adam-Anti-Um's views with no specific reasoning, why not share specifically why you think it "isn't worth the hassle"? Let's see just how "knowledgable in standard economic theory" you are?

Such, if you don't think an RBE is worthwhile, then here's a chance to make your case. To say, why not keep focus on the topics & issues, instead of making it personal?

If you have some point to make, why not just make it and leave out the ad-hominem attacks?

Can you do that? If so, would like to hear what you have to say.

Otherwise, for me, listening to you "isn't worth the hassle". Not very constructive is it?

I gave the advice to NeantHumain. I gave it publicly because I don't like PMs, and because the advice is rather general and extends to anybody.

Secondly, my action is not an "ad hominem", as "ad hominem" refers to the informal fallacy in argumentation, but I didn't present an argument, nor did I counter an argument made by someone else. I stated something I considered to be a fact to a person who would understand the relevance of the issue. Heck, even if I did actually use this in an argument, so long as I don't create a deductive argument, but rather an inductive one, there still wouldn't be a problem.

As for your knowledge coming from a different train of thought, umm... there are a few problems with that line of rebuttal:
1) I said "standard economic theory", and most people from the West, particularly the English-speaking West, know that this refers to Neoclassical economic theory. Any other economics is non-standard.
2) Even further, economics doesn't actually have a lot of accepted trains of thought that are too divergent from the mainstream. That is that almost any form of accepted line of economic thinking is deeply tied to classical economics. Neo-classical economics is a highly mathematical reinvention of classical economics using concepts of marginalism. Marxism is a very left-wing reinterpretation of classical economics. Austrian economics is a very subjectivist and libertarian reinterpretation of classical economics, based upon marginalism. Keynesian economics is a variant of economics born from the criticisms of the mainstream by John Maynard Keynes. Post-Keynesian economics takes Keynesianism further. I mean, anything that is considered economics today is not that divergent. I suppose the one variation that might not be so related is Institutional economics, but it mostly died awhile back anyway, and I know you don't represent it.

As for your system being so different that economic analysis is irrelevant.... um... yeah.... I think that your own statement there just proves to Neanthumain, along with anybody here educated on economics that you really don't know what you are talking about. This is not an ad hominem attack, but rather your ignorance is a fact that limits your ability as a commentator on the subject. Your position both involves a criticism of the current system, and an argument for reconstructing the system. The issue is that both issues are matters where Neoclassical economics does have something to say, but not knowing what is said at all both prevents you from actually really countering it, or even really addressing concerns coming from that direction.

As for what I am trying to accomplish. I just expressed something to NeantHumain so that way he would understand my perception of the situation and gain from it, and so others could do the same.

I already shared a good specific for "why it isn't worth the hassle". Not having background knowledge on the common discourse about the topic can make an individual not worth a conversation, particularly if that individual has a large set of conclusions despite this lack of background knowledge. (A person with no opinions can be relatively flexible) Also, I am relatively "knowledgeable in standard economic theory", I have a degree in economics and a degree in finance, which is better than most people.

JosephMatthew, I can't make a case against someone too incompetent to understand it or reasonably address it, certainly not a person who lacks the language to even dialog about it. I also didn't make it personal. The fact that Adam-Anti-Um lacks background in standard economic theory is a fact. It is a relevant fact to this matter.

Even further, I really have no interest in persuading somebody who lacks the ability to distinguish between a negative comment and an "ad hominem" argument. I also have no concern if you do listen to me, JosephMatthew. I have no interest in constructing something with BS as a building material.

@Awesomelyglorious: I have already stated that I have not created this thread to argue with you about economics. I have made this point perfectly clear. I have created this thread to ask for people's questions for me to answer on my radio show.

Now you can either pose a question, or questions to me, or stop posting on here, I don't have time for your games anymore.

I do not believe I am required to follow such a command from you.

How, specifically, do the Zeitgeist people intend to allocate resources? You have indicated before that some sort of computer system would be responsible. Who is going to program that computer? Do you have any idea how such a program would work? Are you completely unaware of the developments in modern mathematics from Poincaré and Lorenz onwards that pose significant problems to any attempt at a command economy?