Re: Bartering in a cashless society

[Rabid Wombat <wombat@mcfeely.bsfs.org>]

On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Anonymous wrote:

> 
> At 07:46 PM 2/17/99 -0500, Rabid Wombat wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> >
> >>  (2) The impact of new technology is labor reduction.  Any work that
> >>      people don't enjoy doing, can be eliminated.
> >
> >In every society, someone must still pick up the garbage.
> >
> >You don't really work for a living, do you? Must be in academia.
> 
> I don't think realism as applied to our current system/society/
> consciousness is really the intent of such observations.  Obviously,
> given the way humans behave and think today, the way they are
> taught to behave and think, such a society would never exist.  I
> think that's the point that was being made.
> 
> But such a world *could* exist.  Of course, trying to change the realism
> of today into the realism of tomorrow will involve probably hundreds of
> years of work.  But you have to start somewhere, and that somewhere
> is mapping out a plan of what you want, followed of course by a plan
> of how to get there.  

This is a simple problem. It all comes down to scarcity.

If everyone in the society could meet their basic requirements with no 
effort whatsoever (food is plentiful, shelter is unneccessary), nobody 
would need to "work." If nothing was scarce, no value could be attached 
to any material items. Everyone could do with their time as they chose, 
and all acts would be voluntary. People's time and artistic talents would 
be the only commodities, as there would be enough of everything just 
lying around.

This wouldn't last, as people have an innate need to create an 
indentity;  somebody would eventually kill somebody else over a bead 
necklace or some damn thing created with time/talent, the only things not 
in unlimited supply.

Even if this didn't happen, assuming this bounty had some upper bound,
lack of scarcity would only last until reproduction took care of the
problem. Once scarcity sets in, "work" will come about. 

Once work evolves, you'll have people willing and able to do it, and 
fuckwit socialists who want "somebody else" to do it.

This whole thread reminds me of a poli sci prof I had as an undergrad,
who was always going on about the utopia of Sweeden, and how evil the U.S. 
was. Last I heard, the Swedish retires who were dependant on the state run
social welfare pyramid scheme were out dumpster diving for aluminum cans
to supplement their meager pensions. That's what you get when you let 
somebody else decide what's best for you, and what should be done with 
the fruits of your labor.