Does capitalism work?

[Billy T]

OK, 2 new rules:

1)Credit will be transferable between individuals, although paper money will no longer exist. Credit(the new money) will be 100% digital.

2)People will be able to start their own businesses in which to profit directly from, separate from the government and without support from the government. (The only "support" from the government will be in the freedom to use credit.) The private business owner will have to finance everything on his own. He will be solely responsible for directly paying his own employees, and his employees will still receive the minimum pay from the government. (As far as the government is concerned, these private employees will be unemployed). These private businesses will have no government price control of goods and services, and no employee rights/labor laws imposed by the government. Customers of this private business will buy it's goods and services by directly transferring money to the business owner(or associate), instead of redeeming credit back to the system. Since the business is private, it will be responsible for paying "rent" for use of any land. ...

Part I made bold in your text is directly contradicted by your point (1) - You still seem confused and need "money" but do not want it to exist.

I have been an advocate of terminating all paper money for about 40 years. Mainly to make life hell for hard drug dealers who import their drugs, the people paying bribes to congressmen, etc. and give the flat-footed cop chasing the young robber of the liquor store a chance to catch him. (If robber is carrying several hundred dollars of coins that will slow him down and make climbing over fences etc. harder.) I will try to find one of my old post telling of that phase out schedule ($100 and greater bill immediately, the 50s after a year ...etc.)*

It is silly to try to stop the smuggling in of tiny packages of high value drugs entering the US when with only coins available, it would take truck load of coins leaving to pay for them. (Or leave an electronic trail for the police.) In truth, the Government prints $100 bills only to facilate crime - no one else needs them in this age of credit cards and check books. Paying a whore in cash may keep your wife ignorant, but not someone wanting to damage you or the government that has become interested in your activities. If you think that government does not know the details of your private life when it wants to you are naive.

Are you saying that money as fiat coins will still exist, but not as paper? If so I certainly agree that would be a great improvement, but few have listened to me for 40+ years.

On (1) when I flag down a bus passing my broken car and must pay $48 in fare to get ride to next town in Kansas, how do I pay? I assume I write a "check." You may not want to call it that - Perhaps you prefer calling it a "credit transfer order" but the name is not important. Again, there are not digital terminals everywhere. If I am deep sea fishing, had bad luck but guy on boat next to me has caught more than he wants to clean, how do I pay him? Your ideology is making you design a nonfunctional system. You need non digital credit transfer orders ("checks")

Summary:
Your system is not in any significant way different from what already exist in many countries. In Brazil the informal (or underground unregulated) economy is about same size as the official economy. In US it is only about 1/4 as large by many estimates. In both Brazil and US their already is a minimum pay form the government. Sometimes called a negative income tax for the poor, sometimes called "welfare handouts" etc. In Brazil it is called "Bolsa Familia" - given to poor families that keep their children in school to age 18 and with all the required vaccinations. (Many stop school prior to 18 and then the family's monthly payment is reduced as only those children still going to school earn an increment.) There are free clinics etc and many other supports for the poor, including government built housing at lower than market rents. US has surplus food made free to distribution centers etc.

Can you tell anything new or different about your system, not already being used?

------------
*Here is post from June 2006, but there were earlier ones here and my letters to the editors 35 years earlier:

*http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1062875&postcount=24

but seen others tere, especailly post 35.

 

[Read-Only]

Both of you Billy T and Read-Only Have shown to be delusional, mainly because you lack information and how to properly assess and apply what information you do have to gain a further conculsion.

DwayneD.L.Rabon

Oops - went off your medication again, didn't you?

The only one here that's delusional (AND lacks basic sense!) is you, Rabon. Except for that single post that Billy and I commented on, practically everything else you post is completly stupid!!

 

[matthew809]

Part I made bold in your text is directly contradicted by your point (1) - You still seem confused and need "money" but do not want it to exist.

Here is what I wrote: "Customers of this private business will buy it's goods and services by directly transferring money to the business owner(or associate), instead of redeeming credit back to the system."

Sorry, here's what I should have wrote: Customers of this private business will buy it's goods and services by directly transferring credit to the business owner(or associate), instead of redeeming credit back to the system.

Again, credit is the only officially recognized form of "money" in my new system. If I write "money" when referring to my new system, I simply mean "credit".

Are you saying that money as flat coins will still exist, but not as paper?

No coins or paper. All money will be digital.

On (1) when I flag down a bus passing my broken car and must pay $48 in fare to get ride to next town in Kansas, how do I pay? [...] Your ideology is making you design a nonfunctional system. You need non digital credit transfer orders ("checks")

Even in today's monetary system, any person in distress is not guaranteed to have cash or checks on hand to pay off the kindness of a stranger, or a bus driver.

Like I said before, credit transfers will be efficient, fast, and easy. I do not think checks(non digital credit transfer orders) would be necessary, but I would not rule it out. Technology is a wonderful thing.

Also, in my system, bus rides could well be free. Yea I know what you're thinking... it's just so hard for you to imagine a system that works for the people.

In both Brazil and US their already is a minimum pay form the government. Sometimes called a negative income tax for the poor, sometimes called "welfare handouts" etc. [...] There are free clinics etc and many other supports for the poor, including government built housing at lower than market rents. US has surplus food made free to distribution centers etc.

Based alone on what you wrote here, if you can not see the complicated inefficiency of this current system, and the simple efficiency of my system- then you are missing the whole point. And you are.

Handouts, section 8 housing, shelters, tax rebates, welfare... Is that your idea of a great system? What we need is a system where these meager fixes are no longer necessary.

Can you tell anything new or different about your system, not already being used?

Perhaps I should collect my updated thoughts on this new system, and start a new thread to make it more clear to you. This is like showing you one puzzle piece at a time, and you don't seem to be getting the whole picture.

 

[Billy T]

...credit transfers will be efficient, fast, and easy. I do not think checks(non digital credit transfer orders) would be necessary, but I would not rule it out. ... Also, in my system, bus rides could well be free. ...

There is no "free lunch" - Your system may not charge for bus rides (I ride for free in Brazil as over 65 years old) but somewhere in the system the cost of operating the bus is hidden in other costs to the population.

You are claiming that using a credit transfer terminal will be more efficient, faster and easier than taking a few coins from my pocket to buy a news paper or pay for a bus ride. - GET REAL - STOP BEING SO SILLY.

The average distance between those terminals will be more than a block, even in the urban centers. - If it is less, the capital cost of machines, their batteries or electrical wires etc. will be much greater than the current cost of producing fiat coins, which do not break or have their printer jam or run out of paper. How does a 5 year old pay for a lolly pop or 5 cent hard candy? Even if the nearest terminal is just across the street and there is traffic - I would be pissed at your system, especially it makes me miss my bus before I can use machine and twice cross the street. Typically the terminal will be further away and much less convenient than paying with coins from my pocket. How can you be so silly (if not just plain dumb)?

Claiming obviously false things does not make your system attractive. That just shows you have no understanding of the extra costs your system imposes on society or how incovenient it would be.

For example, with your system, I must run to the nearest terminal to avoid missing my bus. When I get there, I find an old lady slowing using the terminal to learn where her credits were spent last month. - That is OK, as I just knock her down and quickly get my bus ride credited coupon printed and run back to catch my bus.

I try not to remember the good old days, when I just took a coin from my pocket and dropped it in the coin box of the bus as I entered. I feel bad that the old lady could not get up again. - Fortunately, I still have credits to pay my shrink to help me easy my feelings of guilt about the old lady. God - I would feel so much better if we just had money again. The whole society is psychologically sick now without it - the things we must do just to survive! No wonder EVERY society has always created some form of money - rare shells, blue stones, pink coral, gold coins, cows, or whatever.*

If I want to take a taxi ride with Joe, the independent one car taxi company, how do I pay him? does he give me his terminal ID or does the terminal print a limited use credit cupon (taxi ride only - we don't want general use money do we )? Please try to explain in detail how I pay a for a taxi ride? Does Joe wait while I go the to terminal? If not, how do I know which taxi driver to credit? Does he park the cab and we both to the terminal? Do not forget that Joe does not know how much it will cost before we get where I am going because of traffic delays. Also I plan to go to location where the nearest terminal is 1/4 mile away. - Do I pay and extra 1/2 mile to the terminal and back to where I want to go, or does Joe pay that extra cost your system forces on us? You are obviously blinded by your silly "no money" concept to the realities of how useful money is. Again tell me in detail how I pay Joe the taxi driver with your terminals instead of my pocket money.

-------------
*A pacific coral island, where there are no natural stones, used the balast stones an English ship left when it took on its cargo more than 300 years ago. They did not circulate. They remained in orderly rows in front of the chief's hut, but each had it owner and every one of the island residents knew which stone was whose. If man wanted a pretty gril for his wife, part of the marriage cerimony was the transfer of ownership of some of the stones, but they of course never moved.

Even that seems more efficient and easier than you "no-money" - only credit terminals system.

 

[matthew809]

There is no "free lunch" - Your system may not charge for bus rides (I ride for free in Brazil as over 65 years old) but somewhere in the system the cost of operating the bus is hidden in other costs to the population.

Thank you for pointing that out, but... I realize that already, and my system would realize that too. Taking all factors into account is pretty much the whole point of my system.

You are claiming that using a credit transfer terminal will be more efficient, faster and easier than taking a few coins from my pocket to buy a news paper or pay for a bus ride. - GET REAL - STOP BEING SO SILLY.

Here's one idea silly billy. Each person would be issued a (credit card sized) identification card which also has a computer, touchscreen, wireless technology, and secure transfer capabilities. Try to take your mind out of the 20th century and have a little imagination. Dedicated terminals are so last century...

Imagine all credit cards, ID cards, paper money, coins, health insurance cards, etc.. being replaced by one sophisticated, general purpose national ID card.

 

[Billy T]

...Each person would be issued a (credit card sized) identification card which also has a computer, touchscreen, wireless technology, and secure transfer capabilities. Try to take your mind out of the 20th century and have a little imagination. Dedicated terminals are so last century...

No problems with imagination, but the wireless link will require energy, especially when traveling between cities, so your unit will be larger that credit card just for the battery (unless you postulate a revolution in stored energy density.)

Your personnal communication devices with touch screens etc. will be paid for by your society. The production cost of one unit for each person would be at least 100 times more than production cost of pocket change of fiat coins (which do not need any energy source to work) for each person.

Also the physics of antennas (in credit card size package) means you are using line of sight frequencies, so do not go into any valleys or behind buildings, etc. Or do you plan to have tall antennas like the cell phones use at least along highways every mile or so? - If so, add them to the system cost.

If you have a cell phone, be honest and tell your typical monthly bill is. Your system will not be magically cheaper. Again your system is much more expensive than fiat money that typically last 40 years, works everywhere, with no batteries to replace etc.

You can dream of many things but cost efficiency is what is important unless you want to reduce everyone's standard of living. - You say you know there is no free lunch, but that knowledge does not affect your ideas. You simply postualte that everything will be cheaper, more-efficient, better etc. but ignore physical limitations and real experience with cost of cell phone like systems.

I do not even think your system would function, so again I ask you to tell in detail how I would pay for a taxi ride to my farm or lake where I go fishing - any remote non-urban spot. (I.e. to a place 1/4 mile out of line of sight communication range.)

 

[matthew809]

No problems with imagination, but the wireless link will require energy, especially when traveling between cities, so your unit will be larger that credit card just for the battery (unless you postulate a revolution in stored energy density.)

Your personnal communication devices with touch screens etc. will be paid for by your society. The production cost of one unit for each person would be at least 100 times more than production cost of pocket change of fiat coins (which do not need any energy source to work) for each person.

Also the physics of antennas (in credit card size package) means you are using line of sight frequencies, so do not go into any valleys or behind buildings, etc. Or do you plan to have tall antennas like the cell phones use at least along highways every mile or so? - If so, add them to the system cost.

If you have a cell phone, be honest and tell your typical monthly bill is. Your system will not be magically cheaper. Again your system is much more expensive than fiat money that typically last 40 years, works everywhere, with no batteries to replace etc.

You can dream of many things but cost efficiency is what is important unless you want to reduce everyone's standard of living. - You say you know there is no free lunch, but that knowledge does not affect your ideas. You simply postualte that everything will be cheaper, more-efficient, better etc. but ignore physical limitations and real experience with cost of cell phone like systems.

I do not even think your system would function, so again I ask you to tell in detail how I would pay for a taxi ride to my farm or lake where I go fishing - any remote non-urban spot. (I.e. to a place 1/4 mile out of line of sight communication range.)

What you see as impossible barriers, I see as normal technological and social obstacles. Have you noticed the miniaturization of electronics? Have you noticed the vast array of ever-increasing cell phone towers? Have you heard of nanotechnology? Have you considered that, if necessary,wallets can also act as docking stations to hold and charge up these new ID cards? It only took me about 5 seconds to think that one up. Imagine what smarter guys could think up with more time.

I see this sort of technology as inevitable, even in the very near future. And I don't think price would be much of an issue for these ID cards since they will be fabricated by machines, and not hand-crafted by over-payed lab coats as you might imagine.

The reason that I am so against physical currency is because it can be lost or destroyed, and it is untraceable. It is bulky and inefficient. And still, you haven't convinced me that hard money is actually necessary; you've only shown me that we are accustomed to it.

 

[Billy T]

What you see as impossible barriers, I see as normal technological and social obstacles. Have you noticed the miniaturization of electronics? Have you noticed the vast array of ever-increasing cell phone towers? Have you heard of nanotechnology? ...

You are ignoring my points. I agree that miniaturization is possible. That is not what I directed your attention to.

Because of physical laws limits on the energy that can be stored per atom,* the energy density possible and because antennas inside credit cars will communicate with high frequency, you cannot have transmission distances for your “intelligent credit card” even as great as current cell phone ranges. – At many location you would not have any way to pay for things with your system. Even if you system fails at only 5% of the locations, it is a total failure without money as a backup system..

You are also, for the third time now, are ignoring my request for you to tell me how I would pay for things in remote locations, (such as the buying fish bait on boat, or the taxi at the lake or at my farm, or to tip the caddy on the golf course - some of the prior illustrations in my requests for an answer.)

If you do not want to be responsive to questions, but just make your unsupported claims, I will stop trying to get you to understand that your system is not only non-functional but also a very much more expensive day dream than pocket change and much less convenient. Have you ever tried to enter data with a pen stylist on a bouncing train? Even with a larger hand-held computer – and you want people to pay their bills with the errors that would be made?

Making everything with automatic machine does not make the cost disappear as you seem to think, even if it were possible. Your system would cost more than current cell phones do – they are already made mainly by automated machines.

-----------------
*Non- nuclear energy is stored in matter in only one of two ways:

(1) First the chemical bonds can be changed to form new compounds which generally speaking are more tightly bound than the "fuel." - This is how batteries and IC engines work.

(2) Alternatively you can only stress the existing bonds between atoms. This is how mechanical spring and capacitors store energy in matter.

As there is a limit on the strength of the atomic bonds, there is a limit on the energy density. I do not know the theoretical limit doubling the current highest achieved energy density is probably impossible. - This physical limit of nature will not be surpassed by "modern technology" or miniaturization as you think due to your lack of understanding the nature of energy storage in matter. You appear equally ignorant of antenna efficiency limits - why cell phones operate at high almost line of sight frequencies. Etc.

The points I made related to these fundamental limitations and you reply about "nano technology" etc. with zero understanding of what I was pointing out to you.

 

[Read-Only]

The points I made related to these fundamental limitations and you reply about "nano technology" etc. with zero understanding of what I was pointing out to you.

And that's not all, Billy. Even though he claims otherwise, his thinking is very, very shallow. It has more holes in it than a 1,000 -pound block of swiss cheese!

Anyone who thinks that technology is the answer to everything has a serious mental block/defect. While technology can make life easier, it also adds layers of complexity that can often confound the situation. And there are MANY problems that it cannot even help with - one of the biggest being the unpredictible, uncontrolable human element. Humans are NOT automatrons.

Regardless of his delusional dream, no type/mix of systems can provide for the feeding and care of it's entire population for FREE! And that's exactly what he's banking on more than anything else. It's just pure nonsense!

 

[lixluke]

An example is two or three guys getting together and working in their basements or garages to invent a new type of computer. (Can you spell Apple Computer?)

It would be sad, sad day when society prevents that sort of thing - through the stupidity of all this "new" thinking!

What are you talking about? That is exactly what capitalism prevents from happening. Innovation, and proliferation of products of the best quality. Millions upon millions of super computers sitting in the heads of millions upon millions of humans who cannot use them because they are too busy sucking their boss's balls 40hrs per week. And their bosses are too busy sucking their boss's balls, and so forth. Thanks Crappytalism!

 

[Read-Only]

What are you talking about? That is exactly what capitalism prevents from happening. Innovation, and proliferation of products of the best quality. Millions upon millions of super computers sitting in the heads of millions upon millions of humans who cannot use them because they are too busy sucking their boss's balls 40hrs per week. And their bosses are too busy sucking their boss's balls, and so forth. Thanks Crappytalism!

There are several people here who are reasonably qualified to speak on the subject - but YOU are not one of them. All you do is whine and complain and even lack the motivation to feed your own lazy rear end!

 

[matthew809]

Because of physical laws limits on the energy that can be stored per atom,* the energy density possible and because antennas inside credit cards will communicate with high frequency, you cannot have transmission distances for your “intelligent credit card” even as great as current cell phone ranges. – At many location you would not have any way to pay for things with your system. Even if you system fails at only 5% of the locations, it is a total failure without money as a backup system...

You are also, for the third time now, are ignoring my request for you to tell me how I would pay for things in remote locations, (such as the buying fish bait on boat, or the taxi at the lake or at my farm, or to tip the caddy on the golf course - some of the prior illustrations in my requests for an answer.)

Here's another idea then. Credit can also be stored on the ID card itself, so that it is not always necessary to have access to remote credit servers in order to process transactions. When the card reconnects with the network, credit amounts will be updated. And these ID cards will not need to have bright energy-sucking screens, or any other fantastic things... they will be energy efficient and minimally designed. So the cards themselves don't necessarily have to have powerful transmitters; just enough to transmit person to person, like bluetooth. Docking wallets (sold separately) could house the main power and larger antennas for more remote trips.

...your system is not only non-functional but also a very much more expensive day dream than pocket change and much less convenient. Have you ever tried to enter data with a pen stylist on a bouncing train? Even with a larger hand-held computer – and you want people to pay their bills with the errors that would be made?

Making everything with automatic machine does not make the cost disappear as you seem to think, even if it were possible. Your system would cost more than current cell phones do – they are already made mainly by automated machines.

The inflated cost of everyday items in capitalism will not be an issue in my system- my system sets the lowest practical price for products in order to control resources, not profit. The only price inflation of products will be used to control the level of demand as to not use up too many resources. Besides, these cards will be government issued, and free. The actual resources used to make these small cards will be relatively minimal. Capitalism has ruined your price perception. It's brainwashed you into assigning (inflated) prices for everything. Not everything needs a price- at least not in my system.

Oh, and about the bouncy trains... what sort of fancy transactions do you plan to execute on the Bumpy Express? And why would you use a pen stylus instead of your fingers????? Remember, these ID cards are not meant to replace PDAs and laptops, they are meant to store and perform simple credit transactions.

...This physical limit of nature will not be surpassed by "modern technology" or miniaturization as you think due to your lack of understanding the nature of energy storage in matter.

A simple google search is able to prove you wrong...

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97543&page=1

 

[Billy T]

...A simple google search is able to prove you wrong...http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97543&page=1

No your link proves I was correct in asserting that you could not store enough ENERGY in you credit card to even do as well as current cell phone in range to the terminals. Here is a quote from top of page two of your link:

"These batteries aren't going to drive a flashlight," says Teeters, because they are so small their energy supply would be quickly exhausted. "There's an incredibly tiny amount of energy involved, but if you have an incredibly tiny device then the device will function for the period of time that it needs to."

I am quite sure a flea can make greater power than one of these atomic batteries. 3.5 volts are not a measure of power. IT IS POWER YOU NEED for transmitters, but now that you have once again changed your system to eliminate the need for distant transmission, it certainly would be possible to transfer credits stored in one credit card to another. Smart way would be to just place them in contact without wireless transmission. I have several credit cards that already have embedded chip and do transfer data by electrical contacts. As the energy supply, a small solar cell would work. That would be my choice as seldom would you need to use it in very low light conditions. Their output voltage is not a function of light intensity so even in dim light they could keep enough energy in a tiny capactor to make the tranfer etc.
One could also easily briefly supply the necessary energy for card to card transfer by piezoelectric effect (slightly bend at least one of the cards before placing them in electrical contact.) but in any case you would need some way to enter the amount to be transferred.

I.e. some sort of key board and display to confirm the amount entered before completion of the transfer is required. More than 95% of the cost of a simple hand held calculator is due to the case, the keyboard and the display so your smart credit cards would cost at least 20 times more than ones I currently can only use in machines (which have these costly items shared by many to spread the cost). Interestingly, often the chip in these most economic hand calculators is the same as in the much more expensive and capable versions as the design cost of two different chips each with smaller production runs is too expensive an approach.

Your reduced system is now at least possible but much more expensive that the one currently used - namely money for Bob to transfer funds to Paul. Also a serious disadvantage of your system is that your entire savings is carried around with you - a robber with knife can clean you out. With the current system I can take only the amount I plan to spend when I go out to eat etc, not everything I have. I.e. you cannot take only 20 dollars with you to limit your losses in case you are robbed. (Robber with knife in your side can get your "pass word" so do not tell me the credit card has a pass word protection.)

SUMMARY: Your reduced system can now at least work, but is more expensive and dangerous than what already is in use - who would want it?

 

[matthew809]

Your reduced system is now at least possible but much more expensive that the one currently used - namely money for Bob to transfer funds to Paul. Also a serious disadvantage of your system is that your entire savings is carried around with you - a robber with knife can clean you out. With the current system I can take only the amount I plan to spend when I go out to eat etc, not everything I have. I.e. you cannot take only 20 dollars with you to limit your losses in case you are robbed. (Robber with knife in your side can get your "pass word" so do not tell me the credit card has a pass word protection.)

SUMMARY: Your reduced system can now at least work, but is more expensive and dangerous than what already is in use - who would want it?

First of all, my system is not being "reduced", it is being refined.

Actually, my system is many times safer than the current system. First of all, in my system, a higher standard of living for all would dramatically decrease robberies and muggings. Downloaded credit amounts onto cards(for remote transactions) would be set by the individual, as well as different layers of security for different transaction amounts. For example, I can choose to only download 500 credits onto my ID card, while the rest of my credit can only be accessed through the network, and more thorough security measures. I imagine, at least for me, that quickly swiping my card for a snickers bar at the snack machine at work would require no pin #, as well as buying a newspaper, or tipping a caddy at the golf course. So these cards would have varying levels of security features(set by the owner) such as passwords, pin numbers, ID check, longer pin #, etc... and cards could very quickly be reported stolen and then disabled via a commonly known phone number (like 911 or 411).

My system would not be more expensive in the bigger picture, and even if it was, this cost would be absorbed into the system and would not be noticed by anyone. You seem to have a real problem seeing the bigger picture, and an obvious bias for capitalism. You seem to think that everything must have a dollar amount attached to it, nothing can be free, and that benefits of national prosperity must be owned and used exclusively by the wealthy, rather than dispersed for the common good(such as in the form of free bus rides... or a 100% digital, free to use, ID/credit card system).

Having a surplus is not an impossibility. Having a national deficit is not the only way for a country to run. My system would maintain a constant surplus to act as a buffer between an increasingly better life for all citizens, and the estimated limitations of the nation. The overall goal of my system would be to constantly improve the lives of everyone within the system. More and more things would become free while still sustaining resources. The obvious direction for my system would be towards a day when all things are free and nobody needs to work(whether that final goal would be possible or not is irrelevant).

 

[Billy T]

First of all, my system is not being "reduced", it is being refined. ...

Call it “revised” “refined” or whatever you like, but your pocket devices is no longer a cell phone, not a digital camera, not a powerful computer, has no connection to the internet, it has dropped it "touch screen" display and perhaps some other original features I forget – that seems to be a “reduction” to me.

I will not try more to make you understand that money in the pocket is cheaper and easier to use or that any of your imagined economies that make so many things free to the public are equally compatible with money as with your electronic pocket transfer terminals.

You have changed the system to allow direct person to person transfer of your credits, allowed the public to decide who is the cook, etc. what he should be paid by buying or not his food at the price he sets, people can start their own business, without government any approval required (or even need to pay taxes to support the common good) and charge whatever the traffic will bear, etc. As the businessmen in your system can have no interference or regulation by the government, not even taxes, most will chose that "informal" - "not officially existing"' way to make even larger than current profits.

SUMMARY: Now you have all the features of "capitalism" fully restored into your system, except for money in the pocket instead of your electronic transfer device. Yet you still claim your system is a vast improvement over capitalism and will make great economies; but fail despite my prior requests to tell how, if in anyway, it differs from capitalism, except the absence of money to pay with instead of electronic transfer devices (which BTW do now already dominate US capitalism transfers with credit cards being swiped in machines by the millions every minute)

You only claim your system is better, easier to use, and more secure, and more economical. I do not see how that can be possible when it has now been "revised" to be IDENTICAL to capitalism except an electronic device has replaced simple, cheap paper money even for buying a pack of gum AND MOST BUSINESS WOULD BE WITHOUT TAXES OR ANY REGULATIONS, only larger than current profits. (Recall you allow them to start up without even the government being informed that they exist and officially they do not exist. Their owners and their laborers could still collect the "not employed" grants you said.)

If your system is not now capitalism, (or worse than that with no regulations etc.), I again ask you to tell some feature that capitalism has which is not now in your latest "revised" version. Until you can do this, with something specific and not just wild unsupported claims of superiority, I will not reply more.

Your level of simplicity and confusion is beyond belief. That is what needs "revision."

 

[matthew809]

I've said from the beginning that my system is derived from capitalism, so obviously there will be similarities. But here are some fundamental differences which you have totally forgot about:

1) People will no longer be paid by employers(except in the condition of the theoretically possible, yet highly unlikely, privately-owned business), but will be paid directly from the government. Every citizen will receive at least a minimum base salary, regardless of employment status, which will be enough to support that person(and his dependents) in the current economy. In the case of those who do work, they will be paid according to their respective worth in society(decided by society itself). They will receive the highest possible pay with consideration of all others, and consideration of the economy and available resources.

In other words, the distribution of wealth will be universally fair.

2) Taxes will no longer exist. Since people will get paid correctly from the beginning, there will be no need for the corrective measure of taxing to redistribute wealth. Also, the government(and public businesses) will no longer need revenue to perform government operations(and business operations). The government, just like any other business in my system, will not depend on profit to function. Free government will be one of those benefits of national prosperity, just like free bus rides, minimum salaries, basic healthcare, free schooling(including college), and free ID/credit cards. But in my system, government and businesses alike will depend on public support in order to last.

3) Businesses (public businesses) will be owned by all. Therefore, the cost of starting a business and the money gained from it will be absorbed by the system, and not by any owners. The public will decide which businesses fail and which ones thrive(passively through purchases, and directly via government). Credit incentives will be strategically placed in order to encourage business growth, production, better quality products, etc. Prices for goods and services will be set by the government at the lowest practical price in order to control resources. Credit redeemed from consumer purchases will not go to the business, nor to the government. It will simply be gone from the consumer's account, and recalculated within the system.

4) Private businesses will have to pay all costs of running a business(as in capitalism), pay "rent" for use of land, and pay employees directly.(These privately employed citizens would still receive the minimum unemployment salary from the government). Private businesses will get to set their own prices for products, and they would get to profit directly from the business. Although I doubt that private business would be able to survive in my system, and this would reflect public content of the system.

5) Money will be 100% digital. National ID cards will replace all other ID cards, banks cards, and credit cards. These cards will be capable of making any and all transactions quicker, easier, and safer than hard money.

Banks, interest, inflation, health insurance companies, the stock market, etc... these unnecessary evils will no longer exist in my system. The system will change from a profit-driven economy, to a value-driven economy. Instead of a business asking "how much money can I save/make from this business decision?"... the question will be "how can I make the consumers and the citizens happy?".

In my system, money may be borrowed from the government interest-free (within calculated reason of course). Debt will be virtually non-existent in my system.

6) Homes will no longer be owned, but instead rented from the government. This is because homes take up too much of a limited resource, and this resource should belong to everybody. And like every other public product in my system, rent will also be set as low as practically possible.

(And this is pretty much what the government does already in the form of property tax. Nobody ever truly owns their home even in the current system.)

7) As I said before, I am only using the word "government" as a temporary place-holder for a better idea. I'm just not exactly sure what that better idea would be...

But I do believe that government power will become more localized, and community driven. No single class, or single person, will hold more power than another, and casting a vote for anything will be quick, easy, and secure.

And my system will not resist change, it will thrive on change. It will change with the people, and it will change with the times. No longer will it's citizens bear the burden of change in place of the system itself.

 

[Billy T]

To Matheu809 (a question and a repeat of my closing comments):

Question:
As there is no money and no one pays any taxes how does the government get Brazilians to ship coffee to the US or an oil terminal in the Person Golf to put oil in one of the US aircraft carriers that is there?

Comment (again):
Your level of simplicity and confusion is beyond belief.

 

[matthew809]

To Mathew809 (a question and a repeat of my closing comments):

Question:
As there is no money and no one pays any taxes how does the government get Brazilians to ship coffee to the US or an oil terminal in the Person Golf to put oil in one of the US aircraft carriers that is there?

Comment (again):
Your level of simplicity and confusion is beyond belief.

My vision is not restricted to the United States. I believe that the whole world should adopt this new system.

However, in such a hypothetical transitional period, where the US is the only country using this exclusive form of credit, we would be forced to trade real things(not the devalued dollar)...But I don't understand how having no taxes would affect international trade. What did you mean by that?

I do believe that, until all countries unite as one, our nation should be self-sufficient. We should not depend on foreign oil.

I haven't thought much about how an American citizen, or government agency, would pay for things outside of the system. That's a good point though...

 

[USS Athens]

His statements were far from excellent - in fact, they show a tremendous amout of ignorance and personal bias.

Perhaps.

I'm certain that some of the people posting here really do NOT know what capitalism actually is.

I know very well what capitalism is.

In short, it's nothing more than a group of people pooling their money together to accomplish something that none of them could afford do alone. Period.

No, it is basically a "free-for-all" socio-economic system where who ever is at the "top" is free to step on those with less economic power. Capitalism is basically a modern, reformed version of feudalism.

An example is two or three guys getting together and working in their basements or garages to invent a new type of computer. (Can you spell Apple Computer?)

I have nothing against people starting their own businesses. This is not a product of capitalism, but of a free market.

It would be sad, sad day when society prevents that sort of thing - through the stupidity of all this "new" thinking!

When would society put a stop to such a thing?

 

[Billy T]

Answer to thread's question:
It sure does if you get bonuses in US, even for bankrupting your firm. - See bold paragraph at end.

The G-20 financial crew. ~4/9/09, getting ready for Pittsburg on 24 September.
“We have broad agreement on a very strong set of principles and objectives for building a more stable global financial system,” U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said after the meeting. “We need to move now to put that framework in place.”

“Without Germany and France insisting, we wouldn’t have come this far,” said German Finance Minister Peer Steinbrueck.

“We’re not going to drop the ball,” said French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde. “Bonuses are quite outrageous.”

The French already have taken strong steps: “In France, BNP Paribas SA and Societe Generale SA were among the banks that bowed last month to President Nicolas Sarkozy, deferring for three years two-thirds of bonuses and paying a third of them in shares. They also vowed to stop offering guaranteed payouts to new hires.”

But in the US: “Goldman Sachs Group Inc. set aside a record $11.4 billion for compensation and benefits in the first half of 2009, up 33 percent from a year earlier, while Morgan Stanley allotted 72 percent of its second-quarter revenue.”

Note that after the “fat cat” CEOs and managers lined their pockets with 72% of the income, the shareholders, I.e. the owners, get to divide 28%.
The US stock proxy voting system makes it almost impossible to change this.

Quotes above from: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=afx1vwj_G6Qo