MoganFreeman said:
You are making the claim, the burden of proof is on you.
This.
There's absolutely no proof that a government or other power in control of resources and that doles it out to citizens according to vaguely-defined needs (and vaguely-supplied needs) would be any different from any other body of power with an absolute monopoly on any resource or product that has already existed.
And the burden of proof
does lie with the people making the claims.
Aramax said:
And to the OP: The reason why everybody keeps bringing up communism is because while the idea changes a few named concepts, the root idea is the same. An unchecked power block, governmental either de jure or de facto, effectively commands and controls all resources and allocation of resources. Theoretically "in order to allow people to live in comfort" but in theory never works. Not only human potential for corruption, but also simple human incompetence.
The idea that nobody would have to work is also laughable, seeing as how all those resources have to be managed and created by
somebody. Labor robots for jobs and manufacturing will also need to be maintained by
somebody. And if this utopian (the "eu-"topian spelling is a clear neologism created by People Who Don't Bother Thinking Things Through) society really does not force people to work, then it will have to entice people to work with more than just "the feeling of being productive" (which is actually another known communist propaganda phrase, and another reason why this idea is compared to communism so often). And if people are enticed to actually do work to keep these products and creations
going, with real tangible benefits to being a worker as opposed to being a non-worker, then it won't be long before the workers start looking down on the non-workers and prop themselves up as the new aristocracy. And a "resource-based system" (though what actual resources and the use thereof has to do with this crackpot idea you've kept wonderfully vague)
will need workers because if nobody works to create, say, video games, then no new video games will get made. And let's face it, making a video game is
work.
If there were no real benefits to becoming a worker compared to a non-worker, then nobody would want to work. And nothing would get done, nobody would be able to sustain this "economy," and nobody would fix those "robots" you seem to think come from thin air. While you've been saying "Virtue is its own reward" to these problems, let's face it, it never is. (Also, communism has tried to get people to act on their better natures to make the system work. It failed every time.) Also, the vast majority of people tend not to give blood unless prodded. (Just sayin'.)
The only people who think that this is a good idea are those who don't bother thinking of ways it can and will go wrong. (There's ways capitalism, communism, mercantilism, and just about every -ism has gone wrong. But there will always be people who pretend that they don't or won't.)
Your claim that human nature does not exist is neither proven nor supported. The statements regarding human nature were created specifically by observing humans act in their best and worst of times, and often with all of the best conditions in place for them to do good or be content. Compared to the people of the medieval period,
we live in Second Jerusalem. And yet human greed, corruption, arrogance, foolishness, and pettiness, have not changed.
You, yourself, show clear signs of the darker side of human nature. (I do, too, but I don't pretend to think that I'm not.)
Your idea of what people "need" (in your opening post) includes a number of luxuries that many people in the world survive without. The idea that we "need" any of these things is due to the effects of capitalism (marketing, specifically), ironically enough, affecting the way one thinks of as "necessities." This smacks of crass materialism, a simple mark of pure greed.
You are Greedy.
Your idea that nobody needs work in order to survive, that entire systems of infrastructure and bureaucracy (in order to manage this "economy") could somehow exist with no effort is a clear sign of typical decadence endemic to those who exist in a privileged life with no clue as to the toil and suffering around the world that exists to prop up your decadent and self-serving life. And your only reason for supporting this idea is so that you can further prop up your decadent life with no effort on your part, and possibly pad it out with extra sex on top of that.
You are Corrupt.
You show signs of clear hubris in presuming that your notions on how the world works, and how people
really work are unequivocally and "obviously" correct and you look down on anyone who disagrees with you. You are so convinced in yourself that you refuse to take a good look at the potential cause-and-effect that your ideas would bring about. And any conclusions you approach you ignore out of hand because you believe you couldn't possibly be wrong.
You are Arrogant. (And possibly narcissistic.)
You refuse to examine any potential issues with putting your ideals into practice. You refuse to think these ideas through. You never realized precisely
why your ideas kept getting compared to communism, despite the fact that the parallels were obvious to everybody who pointed them out to you. And you also used Image Macros at face value--a key sign that you never caught on to the fact that most people over the age of 14 use them ironically. While a minor quibble, this is indicative of a greater lack of perceptive ability or carefulness of thought.
You are Foolish.
Your only replies to your critics have been condescending at best, and insulting at worst. Your topic implies you think this thread brings greater moral worth to your own views and actions. And while I'd suspected you were a troll at first, and a good one, I've decided to post anyway because you seem intent on continuing this farce and I might as well hop on board. You look down on people, you dodge criticism, and your posts seem more intent on belittling those who deny you your opportunity to stroke your ego than to open up any logical discourse.
You are Petty. (And if you're just trolling, then at least this one applies either way.)
You embody the worst parts of the decadent capitalist outlook, with none of the practical, useful parts. Your self-interest and self-aggrandizing clearly dominate your intent, and no amount of fuzzy feel-good words like "virtue" or "goodness" can hide that fact. There are two differences between you and Karl Marx. Marx had only the best of intentions and was not selfish in his ideals (he even stepped back from Marxism when it became clear that the world didn't need it in order to become a better place), and he also bothered to
do his homework. He was a thinker, not a follower.
If you want to test your ideas so bad, go start up a settlement somewhere and have a go. That's what other people do. Granted, they need money in order to procure the materials and resources they need to start.
(As an aside: The Venus Project is pure utopian fluff from Mr. Fresco's thinky-box. It's an ideal, but not a means to reach it. And it reeks of the typical unsustainability all utopian-based-on-perspectives-and-misconceptions-gained-from-living-in-a-nonperfect-society ideas come packaged with. An ACTUAL, as in defined in the real world by real economists, resource-based economy is something like a country whose main exports rely on natural resources in THIS economic system. Many prosperous middle east countries, for example, are made wealthy by their natural resources. And they are among the least utopian societies in the world, especially socially. So sticking the label "resourced-based economy" onto a utopian ideal is the worst kind of public relations gaffe.)
Personally? I see a worldwide Venus Project quickly devolve into something akin to feudalism when people start taking advantage of it. And when the new aristocracy controls all luxury, technology, information, training, automation, and necessities, it'll be a new dark age of humanity. Because no power can exist without corruption, even if it starts out benign.
Heck, I'd probably try to get in on that new aristocracy business if it were ever to happen. It beats becoming the new serfdom.
(And your refusal to accept that your taken-from-some-guy idea is bunk because you insist someone ought to come up with something better misses the point entirely. People live in the real world and cope with the real world.)
...
TL;DR There is no such thing as a magic bullet, you greedy, corrupt, arrogant, foolish, petty little troll.