A World Without Currency

[TheMatsjo]

It's called communism. And I'm sad to say it doesn't work.

Actually that's not what it's called at all, please don't just throw words around. It bugs me that people systematically equate this term with whatever's convenient at the time.

Not all types of currency are measured in what we call money. Bartering, trading or even honor systems are ways of exchanging goods and services. The good thing about money is that is easily transportable and convertable. The problem is that it's an abstract thing that makes it very easy to exploit and deceive with.

I don't think money as a concept in this world is a problem, although I would welcome a world where it is no longer necessary.

Cheers,
Matsjo

 

[midknight129]

There seems to be some misunderstanding as to the question posed by the OP. He asked how a world without currency could work. He didn't ask for a pile of cop-outs and excuses as to how it couldn't work. Value has become more and more abstracted over the course of human history. It started with the barter system; utility value for utility value. Later, we used rare metals as a medium of exchange. Then, we established paper money printed and distributed by the government. Now, the value of exchange is transfered largely by digital transactions. There is a clear trend towards the abstraction of value and the natural end-point is where a medium of exchange is simply not needed anymore. That is evolution. To say that how people are now (self-serving and lazy) is an indication of how we will always be is to deny the process of evolution. Do you think the Wright brothers or any other inventor gave up after the first failure? Think of all the things that have been said about the most progressive inventions: The airplane will never fly, the steam engine is a waste of time, the computer will never find a market, microprocessing is a fad. All these things that the majority of "experts" claimed would never work ended up revolutionizing the world.

There are people in the world at this very, very moment who are ready and willing to effortlessly move to an economy without money. We're all waiting for the rest of you to catch up with us because it's a step we can only make all together. The only thing that would make such a revolution impossible is the stubborn, backwards insistence that it is impossible. Drop that assumption, and it suddenly becomes possible. Once it becomes possible, get started.

 

[mercifulwrath]

It's called communism. And I'm sad to say it doesn't work.

Actually that's not what it's called at all, please don't just throw words around. It bugs me that people systematically equate this term with whatever's convenient at the time.

Not all types of currency are measured in what we call money. Bartering, trading or even honor systems are ways of exchanging goods and services. The good thing about money is that is easily transportable and convertable. The problem is that it's an abstract thing that makes it very easy to exploit and deceive with.

I don't think money as a concept in this world is a problem, although I would welcome a world where it is no longer necessary.

Cheers,
Matsjo

The central flaw remains the same as in communism though, and that's what I was pointing out. You suggest an "honor system," which would only work if all parties involved are in mutual agreement to what constitutes as work and services rendered. In an ideal communist society, people would want to think that their work is not more than the work of others, and that they are getting the same as every other person for the simple fact that they are doing the same workload as every other person.

 

[Griffstar]

Heres my opinion on the matter, (now that I have time)

A world without currency, I believe wouldn't last long if we kept our most precious habits. We would all have to contribute to labor as jobs would be virtually pointless now that their is no reward for the hard work. Many company's would collapse, and only the powerful, needed company's would stay in power. Goverments' would have to re-write the whole system, schools would need to change their whole curiculum, food shortages for a while. But I seriously think we could make it if everyone chipped in. People being required to work for food and common household thing, the world would be a much nicer place. Being "taxed" to give an equal amount of food to neighbore's.

Their are obvious cons, riots, revoloution's, and pretty much our entire society would collapse for a while. We would have to write the book again.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Services would most likely take its place, whereby expertise in doing something useful with material resources would become a massive commodity. And education would be paid for with said resources. And knowledge would literally become power, and progress would stagnate due to technologies being even more jealously guarded than they are now. Then again, I'm drunk and this probably makes no sense. I'll let the community decide.

 

[amadhatter]

I'd be referring to myself as "Lord Humongous" before you know it.

 

[Serioli]

It's kind of addressed in Iain M Banks 'Culture' novels, BIG riders though:

Basically AI's run and administer everything that is necessary (food, energy, construction, medicine, education...EVERYTHING) and the society exists 'beyond resources' (energy is 'bought in' from hyperspace, there are enough planets in the Culture that you could/can have everything you want.) All humans have to do is exist and enjoy themselves.

TLDR: Effectively infinite resources would be needed for a world without currency.

 

[midknight129]

I can imagine buying a car in a properly working society that doesn't operate on money. You go to the car depot, find a model that suits your needs, get the keys, and drive it home. Of course, in such an ideal society, public transportation would be the preferred method of transportation. People wouldn't be paid in chickens or nonsense like that. You need food? You go to the grocery depot and pick up your food. There's work to be done? You volunteer to do it. What would the system all run on? Not money nor barter but self-discipline

 

[Lyx]

I do not think that a large scale economy (beyond district scale) can efficiently work without "something" that works like a currency. The main feature of "currency" here is to efficiently "store" wealth.

I do NOT think that this commodity needs to be fiat money (actually, i consider fiat currency something that is probable to be abused) - but for larger economies to work efficiently, there needs to be a commodity that is efficient at representing potential wealth.

By the way: I do not think that every trade needs to require a market and a kind of "money". Existencial basics for example to not necessarily need to go through the whole market thingie.... in fact, that the current economy model requires existencial basics to work via the free market model, and be paid for with money, is the ONLY reason why unemployment is a problem.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Not money nor barter but self-discipline

Sounds more like group discipline to me.

 

[LikeDustInTheWind]

italics for world ending.

Cracked has long since put the fear of Science into me. But most people just shrug off my doomsday ramblings as pro-religion propagating.

Who needs cracked to be scared of science?

In ten years, we will have technology that will have the capacity to run wild and end us all. Nanobots are particularly frightening.

As long as they're not self-replecating and/or self-aware we should be ok... I think.

 

[DefunctTheory]

italics for world ending.

Cracked has long since put the fear of Science into me. But most people just shrug off my doomsday ramblings as pro-religion propagating.

Who needs cracked to be scared of science?

In ten years, we will have technology that will have the capacity to run wild and end us all. Nanobots are particularly frightening.

As long as they're not self-replecating and/or self-aware we should be ok... I think.

The problem is that nanobots will, most likely, not be mechanical constructs: they'll be modified bacteria, or some sort of multi-cellular organism (But still small). Because the life of a single celled creature, for the most part, is short, they will most likely be allowed to self replicate at a reasonable rate. Until something goes wrong.

Go read Prey, by Micheal Crichton.

It's freaking horrifying.

 

[LikeDustInTheWind]

The problem is that nanobots will, most likely, not be mechanical constructs: they'll be modified bacteria, or some sort of multi-cellular organism (But still small). Because the life of a single celled creature, for the most part, is short, they will most likely be allowed to self replicate at a reasonable rate. Until something goes wrong.

Go read Prey, by Micheal Crichton.

It's freaking horrifying.

Something like cancer would come along and they would replicate out of control... Dammit I wanted nanobots!

 

[Laser Priest]

Money was a system added to give goods and services specific values as a convenience to everyone.

It would be taking a step back. Many centuries back.

 

[Merkavar]

so what will we do? go back to bartering? we used to do that before money. cause money is superior. its a means of exchange. its divisable and you can save it and has an accepted value. you cant normally trade pig leg for a loaf of bread cause you once you cut the leg of the pig wont last much longer.

so what are the other option for no money? credits like in most sci fi show. its just non paper money.

I can not see any complex society like there are today working with out currency.

Like people said above the only way you can get a world like this is through world peace where everyone works and get what they want. sort of like a good version of communism. but also like someone said there are a million little reasons to cause conflicts.

 

[Dragonpit]

It's actually much simpler than all this. If we didn't have currency, we would probably just end up trading goods...or stealing them from others. We'd either be forced to help others alongside ourselves, or ruin other for our own sake. The man who has the most possessions would quickly become the most powerful. It's as simple as that.

 

[Lyx]

It's actually much simpler than all this. If we didn't have currency, we would probably just end up trading goods...or stealing them from others. We'd either be forced to help others alongside ourselves, or ruin other for our own sake. The man who has the most possessions would quickly become the most powerful. It's as simple as that.

That doesn't sound so different to be honest.

Still, you're ignoring one of the big advantages of a commodity that can universally and without "decay" store wealth. The two major issues with having not standardized commodity to store wealth are this:

1. Decay. Take for example foodstuffs. For its value to not decay, you need to trade it for something else, before it becomes worthless. This runs pretty much contrary to your argument as the one with the most possessions becoming the most powerful: Unless his power is mostly based on something that doesn't decay quickly, "savers" would actually be the least powerful people. In principle, what you'd get with no efficient value-storage commodity, is high inflation. Then again, that too doesn't sound so different to the state of things nowadays....

2. A universal value-storage commodity, you can trade for almost anything. A commodity that only has use in specific situations, you can only trade with people who need that commodity right now (or know others who need it). Thus, "incompatibility bloat" arises... either the one you trade with has to have need for your good in the short-term, or he needs to engage in complex back-and-forth trades to make it work.

 

[midknight129]

Not money nor barter but self-discipline

Sounds more like group discipline to me.

What's a group but a collection of "self's"? There's two kinds of discipline: the kind that's imposed upon you and the kind you impose upon yourself. Self-discipline is the preferred kind. I define Discipline as "The ability to do what needs to be done regardless of preference."

 

[DefunctTheory]

Not money nor barter but self-discipline

Sounds more like group discipline to me.

What's a group but a collection of "self's"? There's two kinds of discipline: the kind that's imposed upon you and the kind you impose upon yourself. Self-discipline is the preferred kind. I define Discipline as "The ability to do what needs to be done regardless of preference."

'Work random jobs or the world will collapse' sounds like a rather imposing discipline to me.

 

[SirDoom]

The only way a no-currency system would work is if we had access to unlimited resources.

It's been brought up before, but think Star Trek. They have matter replicators. No matter what kind of house you have, you can get by very comfortably if you have one of those.

The thing is, even in that scenario, that replicator can't make more land and put a mansion on it for you. Resources are still limited, and thus it wouldn't work. As long as there is a better alternative to what a person has, there needs to be some form of currency to allow him or her to attempt to obtain said alternative.

(Giving everyone the exact same resources wouldn't work, because they know there is a better alternative. They know they have less than what they could, and will still have a desire to try and obtain more, which will upset the balance and end up ruining the whole system.)

So, as long as we have even a single resource that isn't unlimited, it won't work.