The Venus Project

[IDoNotCare]

Imagine living in a decent house rent free. We already should be doing this and we don't need a venus project to do so. All the places exist, all the replacement parts, the electrical grid. This is an issue of incentive, money doesn't actually do anything but grow in number as resources run out, in essence it doesn't do anything but grow like a parasite in your pocket. No, no, enough of that nonsense. Here's to the future, [url=https://www.thevenusproject.com/faq/what-is-the-plan/]coming along at a snail's pace[/url]:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QorK2X7GsVU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYodgWapmgc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-M_kVZTf50

The biggest problem is that people are being born with no place to stay, unless they win competition for it. This is not nice at all! First of all if you're going to do that to people raised to work, then you shouldn't raise them in a place like America you should raise with the Aboriginal peoples that live off the land in huts. Second of all competition for Maslow's hierarchy of needs, the base of it, causes death and murder. 

 

 

 

A resource based economy has been on 60 minutes, it's been on numerous Ted talks, they kick the shit out of socialists in arguments! So why haven't the Projects been built yet? In fact we could have built a Venus Project when we built the Pruitt Igoe projects. What's the deal, why aren't 100% of us fighting for this, much less talking about it? I have personally gone to war with the local authorities in Missouri over this. 

Edited July 12, 2020 by IDoNotCare

[Endy0816]

Can you describe what the Venus Project is for us?

[IDoNotCare]

26 minutes ago, Endy0816 said:

Can you describe what the Venus Project is for us?

I did in the first few sentences. 

We account for things, construction is automated from the Earth to your house, all replacements you'll ever need accounted for. It's doing it smart, it's accounted for. 

We would even account for when we'd run out of precious materials, and replicate the ones we do have using simple chemistry. No money, no scarcity, no inflation. No scarcity arises. We already do a headcount on projected population growth, we just don't care. The free market economy is destroying lives as we sit here. 

I'm sure you're wondering "what if the automation breaks down", and I point you back to accounting. Von Neumann probes are a great remedy for this, you only need one in good working condition and in 80 years you can cover the earth in automation, and the only things doing any work the whole entire time was the automation! This is not new, and we certainly have to technology. Only a fraction of a percent of modern people even have the resources to get into engineering, the rest is public service and sales: monotonous, obsolete, most of the time demeaning, doesn't pay enough, and the whole idea of earning a scratch of a living to pump money back into the prison planet of capitalism is really irksome. The living quality will continue to decline worldwide, and all countries are the same with minutiae variations we are all living in Amerika. Whereas an RBE is radically different, and not the potato potahto of Marxist and Communist which really have no difference between Democrat and Republican or socialist or conservative or whatever they are literally not addressing the issue of technology vs muscle. 

And if somehow RBE self-autonomy did break down and we needed construction workers again it's not like they're not there. And it's not like we wouldn't have plenty of engineers the whole point is free education, so there'd be far more engineers in an RBE than ever partly because it's free and mostly because of how much time we're allowing our technology to save us. Right now it's like we're in the way of our technology, too many Protestants and Presbyterians I suppose. 

Edited July 12, 2020 by IDoNotCare

[IDoNotCare]

Greta has billions listening to her about climate change, she could do so much more damage to Uncle Sam if she marketed the Venus Project to her followers than with a speech on deaf ears:

 

[zapatos]

2 hours ago, IDoNotCare said:

We account for things, construction is automated from the Earth to your house, all replacements you'll ever need accounted for. It's doing it smart, it's accounted for. 

 

Can you please provide additional detail? "We account for things" doesn't really tell us much. 

Same with "construction is automated from the Earth to your house", "all replacements you'll ever need accounted for", and "It's doing it smart". 

[IDoNotCare]

17 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Can you please provide additional detail? "We account for things" doesn't really tell us much. 

Same with "construction is automated from the Earth to your house", "all replacements you'll ever need accounted for", and "It's doing it smart". 

 

1. Excerpt copied (and edited) from the Venus Project site:

"A Resource-Based Economy is a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of any system of debt or servitude like money, credits or barter. All resources become the common heritage of all people^[1], not just a select few. The premise upon which this system is based is that the Earth is abundant with plentiful resource; our practice of rationing resources^[2] through monetary methods^[3] is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival.

Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed and the people accept money as an exchange medium for the scarce resources.^[4] Money^[5] is a social convention, an agreement if you will. It is neither a natural resource nor does it represent one. It is not necessary for survival unless we have been conditioned to accept it as such." ^[6]

2.

"when futurists refer to ‘resource based economics’ today, in a post-industrial context, they’re usually talking about systems where global resources are managed rather like municipal utilities and as a result currencies become redundant. No one ‘owns’ water. Communities create facilities for its collection and distribution as a public utility. Imagine that all resources and many commodities were treated this same way and you have part of the picture of what a resource based economy means. Such systems are anticipated to evolve from global digital networked market systems that become ‘commoditized’ by the trends in decentralization of production. In other words, because production is local, markets stop trading in finished products and labor and start dealing in a broad spectrum of commodities in increasingly fractionalized unit volumes evolving toward just the Periodic Table plus energy. Soon they become so efficient -as commodities markets tend to if left to their own devices- that they come to ‘know’ in an algorithmic sense the full extent of world resources and demand and their respective cycles and ‘bandwidth’, eliminate currency as a metric of market values by allowing resource values to be indexed relative to each other, and eliminate profit and speculation by compelling capitulation (the tendency of participants in a market to conform collectively to its trends) and driving the market toward equilibrium. At this point the system stops being a market for resources and commodities and becomes an Internet (an open-Internet) for them instead, compelling the relinquishing of individual control of resources and the management of their exploitation to the system itself as a world utility driven by demand. The result is a money-less society where all resources are free, within reason, and distributed automatically in response to demand. This is what futurist Jacque Fresco has dubbed Cybernation; world resources managed as a global societal commons by a demand-driven computer-based world utility."^[7]

3. Rene Muller:

"The Resource-based Economy (RBE) concepts propose a way to abandon money and the speculation with it; and get back to resources directly without the involvement of money as a regulatory tool. It assumes that with today's technology it would be possible to measure and store the quantity of a certain good, and connect with the demand or requirement side and share the resources, and skip the speculative and profit aspect in the exchange.

The term itself "Resource-based Economy" was adapted from The Antigonish Movement of Canada's Resource Based Communities concept and later reintroduced by Jacques Fresco, who also initiated The Venus Project (TVP), the term was then adapted by other groups, such as The Zeitgeist Movement (TZM), People 4 Social Sustainability (PSS), The Resource Based Economy Foundation, and The Technocracy Movement.

A brief explanation of RBE:

"A Resource-Based Economy is a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of money, credits, barter or any other system of debt or servitude. All resources become the common heritage of all of the inhabitants, not just a select few. The premise upon which this system is based is that the Earth is abundant with plentiful resources; our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival."^[8]

Another key element:

Abundance, Efficiency and Sustainability are, very simply, the enemies of profit. This scarcity logic also applies to the quality of goods. The idea of creating something that could last, say, a lifetime with little repair, is anathema to the market system, for it reduces consumption rates, which slows growth and creates systemic repercussions (loss of jobs, etc.). The scarcity attribute of the market system is nothing but detrimental for these reasons, not to mention that it doesn't even serve the role of efficient resource preservation, which is often claimed.^[9]

RBE is promoted by various groups and might differ in the details but agree on the following:

• common holding of land by the people
• common holding of the means of production
• common holding of the resources
• common distribution of consumables / goods / commodities and so on
• automation of the manufacturing process i.e. resources into semi-consumables and semi-consumables into consumables
• beyond the use of money, credit, barter, exchange, and all forms of interest bearing debt
• post-scarcity system of shared social abundance

Resource-based Economy (RBE) emphasizes the availability of the resource itself and proposes to abandon money as a value system, and value the resource directly (how this is done in detail is not explained). It assumes all resource-based needs can be satisfied with the technological achievement we made as humans. It certainly addresses the issue of survival conditions which we as humans developed in early times, and which are now no longer useful; hence, developing an awareness and consciousness of sufficiency or even abundance and away from scarcity."^[10]

Typology of RBE Movements

Humanistic RBE

Rene Muller:

"As pointed out above, the TVP and TZM view on RBE is a rather mechanistic and technocratic solution, and lacks some of the humanistic, spiritual and holistic perspectives, fortunately there are also other groups who work on developing RBE further with a large scope, like The Resourcebased Economy.com:

As there is a lot of talk about technology, design, architecture and the like this website (TheResourcebasedEconomy.com) tries to discuss the term ‘resource based economy’ from a human perspective based on existing and possible future values on this planet. When this website was formed, one found almost nothing about a resource based economy online in spite of the websites of The Venus Project and The Zeitgeist Movement.

This site was made to remedy that. Still, the term ‘resource based economy’ can be replaced/overlapped by many other terms.

Resource based economy (RBE), Natural Resources Economy, Resource Economy, Moneyless Economy (MLE), Love Eased Economy (LBE), Gift Economy (GE), Priceless Economic System (PES), Trust Economy (TE), Sharing Society, Resource Based Society, Moneyless Society, Love Based Society, etc. etc. It is all the same thing. It doesn’t really matter what we call it, as long as it has the basic notion of an economic system where no money is used, ownership and trade is abandoned and replaced with usership and giving and all resources (both human and planetary) are shared and managed properly. On this site we will mainly use the term Resource Based Economy. We could add ‘Gift’ in the title (Resource Based Gift Economy), to emphasize that on a local micro level, we need to simply give and share our personal resources, while we at the same time, on a global macro level, manage global resources. (from The Resource-based Economy.com: About)

A simple definition for RBE from the same web-site:

“A resource-based economy is a society without money, barter or trade, with the awareness that Humanity is One family and where technology, science and spirituality is used to it’s fullest to develop and manage the planet’s resources to provide abundance for everyone in the most sustainable way.”

It further addresses the mindset and the consciousness to live in such a RBE system:

RBE is not an ‘establishment of a system’, but rather the emergence of a system, coming from it’s citizens and not from any ‘rulers’, as there are no rulers in RBE. That it is an emergent system is crucial to understand. It is not a top down system, but a bottom up system based on a shift in mindset of the population.^[11]

And specifically speaks of a continual emergence of a system of self imposed management of human and natural resources both locally and globally where the following happens:

• money is replaced by gratitude
• trading is replaced by sharing and
• ownership is replaced by usership

... in a way where everyone’s needs are met.

Currently responsibility and ownership are closely tied together; in other words, you care about things you own; things you don't own you don't usually care, even avoid to get involved because it's considered "none of my business". In a RBE system, where there is no or little individual ownership but owned by the collective, the responsibility and the will to take care of and maintain things would be entirely new: you care for the things you use, but don't personally own. As described in the Gift Economy, a sense of family and intimacy among those who share things to use and not own privately has to emerge."^[12]

Directivist RBE

Rene Muller:

"People 4 Social Sustainability (PSS) also has picked up (August 2011) the term from its predecessor "The Promethean Workers Association (PWA)" a movement that drew ideas largely from Robert Anton Wilson's "Prometheus Rising" and on Gnosticism, Discordianism, Metaphysics, and RBE that publically accepted neophytes/ initiates as a movement/ tradition from 2004-2010. PSS adapted PWA's version of RBE and separated it from the more mystical tradition based New Aeon view's of The PWA. The Directivist RBE was then defined beyond its initial purely mystical basis as a more idealistic and philosophical view point with an open and secular spiritual view point:

An economic system based on direct-common ownership of land, resources, production, distribution, and allocation, characterized through non-usury (monetary) intelligent management of resources for common consumer social abundance rather than profit-based scarcity (Capitalism) or need-based scarcity (Socialism). A gift economy in which the need for money, barters, or exchange is surpassed by the development of advanced earth-based technologies.

A post-scarcity society in which shared social abundance replaces the implied and artificial social notions of resource scarcity.

(In Directivist Theory) An essential third way post-monetary developmental stage achieved through the abolishment of state-property-centered and private-property-centered economic systems.

A) An application of alchemy towards the solving of social problems with earth based technology.

B) A guaranteed focus on the spiritual transcendence of society towards ascension and greater heights of spiritual understanding.

C) Guaranteed direct access by all to the means of all necessary production

D) Directly Democratic and technical assisted facilitation of resource management, utilization, and distribution.

E) Election of Alchemists to develop ways to relieve society from the burdens of menial labor and allow all members of society to engage in creative, fulfilling social endeavors

F) Use of Energy Credits to track renewability of resources and give a share of social abundance to everyone" (http://occupyconcepts.org/wiki/Resource-based_Economy)

Interviews

1

1. Interview of Stephanie Smith, founder of the We Commune software project, by Allison Arieff of Shareable magazine:^[13]

Interview:

“AA: Explain the idea of the Third Economy.

SS: The Third Economy is a group-based resource-sharing economy. I coined the term in order to give shape to the informal exchanges that are beginning to happen as a result of the failures of the first (cash) and second (credit) economies. Economies are constructs (Visa created/implemented the credit economy with the help of Madison Avenue ‘Mad Men’ about 50 years ago).

I think it’s time to work together to build a new one; one with a different set of underlying values that are more in tune with our times, and one that is built from the bottom up by people who have intimate knowledge of, and experience with, the needs and desires of their local communities.

Allison Arieff: I think it’s so important to develop online strategies that extend to offline. Tell us about the tools you’re creating, and how they might start to take shape on the street.

Stephanie Smith: The first tools we’ll launch over the next six months or so include a Facebook app that helps users post and manage a “share,” barter or group barter (i.e., a dog walking club or childcare co-op), and a digital bulletin board tool that people working in cafes and co-working environments can use to post real-time resource-sharing opportunities.

A third tool we’re working on is a surplus re-allocation tool designed for urban districts that allows anyone to create a free shelf, box, table, or room, and add it to a map so that others can find and use it; they can take something, leave something, or both.

AA: There’s a lot of this share/trade/barter stuff happening now, especially in more progressive cities like Portland and San Francisco. Is there hope for this sort of momentum elsewhere?

SS: I’m always excited when progressive people in urban centers pioneer new approaches. We’re watching, participating and learning from many of these pioneers, especially on the west coast. What’s interesting about the Third Economy, however, is that it’s happening informally across America, in cities, suburbs and rural areas, as people confront our new economic reality. For instance, the numerous childcare co-ops and wholesale buying clubs that are started by average folks every day to get some of their economic needs met in a group format.

The best way to build on this momentum, both among pioneers in progressive urban centers, and by average people across America, is to make these informal resource-sharing behaviors one notch more formal. Give them a name – Third Economy, and let people know that when they share resources as a group in order to save money and build deeper community, they’re actually participating in a structured, economic system that has value and meaning.”^[14]

2

Singularity Utopia (SU) of Singularity-2045.org interviewed by René K. Müller (RKM) of OccupyConcepts.org on October 10-18, 2012.

* How do you define RBE and how do you think it differs from Post-Scarcity?

RKM: Take a look at Resource-based Economy where I summarized some of the key issues, and also formulated the criticism.

SU: This is where I disagree strongly with RBE advocates, when they say we already have enough resources. They say scarcity is merely a distribution/greed issue. While I fully recognise the 1% make things a lot worse for the majority, compared to how things could be, I am sure, looking at all factors, that we cannot have Post-Scarcity merely by having better distribution; thus things will not be free with better distribution based on our current technology.

On the issue of how, it is a simple issue comparable to how you breathe. How do you breathe? You simply suck air into your lungs; you never worry about a scarcity of air because it is all around us, it is not scarce.

How would people gain access to free computers in a Post-Scarcity situation? It would be similar to breathing air. You would simply compute via the super-abundance of computers all around you. Intel have stated (via their resident futurist Brian David Johnson) that meaningful computation (the chip size) will approach zero size in 2020, which means you could potentially have cheap microscopic computers in clothes, cups, paint, anything.

Recently I read about the ability to print solar cells. Imagine how 3D printing will have developed 20 or 30 years from now, we will be able to print anything, for example imagine being able to print powerful computers, or imagine printers that can deconstruct printed objects. So if computer chips are zero size by 2020, what about 2030, or 2040? What will evolved AI be capable of 30 years from now?

Look at various aspects of technology then project them 30 years into the future and that is the how.

Today I looked at pay-as-you-go cell phones in the supermarket and the cheapest one was only 14 US$, which is cheaper than 10 years ago and the technology in it is incredibly sophisticated compared to 10 years ago. You can also buy a corded landline handset for only $3.45. In another ten years companies will possibly give cell phones away or perhaps they will cost $2; or perhaps we must wait 20 or 30 years before there is such a drop in price, but the sure thing is that by 2045 everything will be free.

* RKM: What is the difference between having sufficient for all and Post-scarcity? What is free? When is something free for you?

SU: The difference between "sufficient for all" and Post-Scarcity is that the "sufficient for all" idea would or could entail rationing, there would likely be strict management of scarce resources to entail the sufficiency. Sufficient for all would or could entail mere provision of basic needs such as food and shelter, whereas Post-Scarcity entails no management or rationing, there is no need to regulate scarce resources, there are no limits in a Post-Scarcity situation.

“Sufficient for all” is imprecise because it could apply to a very wide variety of situations depending on how you define sufficient. For example the amount of platinum per individual could easily have a differing level of sufficiency for each person. A sufficient amount of cake per person is a differing measurement for each person similar to a sufficient amount of computing power. I am sure many millionaires think they have insufficient funds, which is why they are so desperate to earn more money; whereas many poor people might opt for eternal retirement if they had only 1 million in currency.

I doubt you could ever have a situation where everything is free if the resources are scarce. If there is very effective management of scarcity to entail a "sufficient for all" scenario, you will nevertheless have prices despite the sufficiency. Something is free in the monetary sense when it has no price, and there will always be price in a scarcity situation because human greed, the fear of scarcity, cannot be completely eliminated during a scarcity situation."^[15]

That's not all I said. That's a fraction of what I wrote, if you want blueprints go to their website, there's dozens of youtube videos as well. There's ted talks, they were on 60 minutes, there's also the links I provided.

Would you prefer to not do research and rest on what I say?

https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Resource-Based_Economy

Edited July 12, 2020 by IDoNotCare

[iNow]

Oh, good. I was hoping you’d just copy paste an entire website into one post with no commentary of your own. That’s so much better than actual discussion on an actual discussion forum. Bravo. Thanks for not failing to disappoint 👌 

[IDoNotCare]

Will you and your two alternate accounts stop trying to draw away from the topic of discussion PLEASE?

Anyway a self-autonomous socioeconomic grid has never been done before, this is HUGE. Why aren't more people talking about it? This needs to be done. We should have had the Projects like these housing our poor DECADES AGO. Why? I'm asking the members here, why? 

Well I'll tell you why, every single person under the upper middle class would migrate into these projects. Normally when we think of projects we think ghetto, but these are NICE. No one, and I mean no one, would support GM anymore, the wealthy, everyone above the middle middle class would vanish. And rich people do like their servants. 

We need to not occupy wallstreet, we need the police to step aside and let us give to those who have it coming to them. I bet another half-decade like this and you will see a civilian coalition of impoverished start taking homes and giving home owners the boot. We will outnumber them anyway. The situation grows more serious than you and your alts might think. It might be me kicking you out of your own home, I'm a fighter, are you? Have you ever been in a real fight to death? 

Do you think you deserve a home and another does not? Because you're a bootlicker? Like it or not war is coming and your only way out is Venus Project. I would say they should have arrested me for attacking them. But I can collate just as well with inmates. 

Edited July 12, 2020 by IDoNotCare

[iNow]

Yes. You’re so totally right. I’m finally busted.

I’ve spent years and years setting up sock puppet accounts, one with nearly 5,000 posts and a positive rep of almost 1,600, then another with almost 22,000 posts and a positive rep of nearly 5,600... and I’ve setup these profiles ALL just so I could draw attention away from an idiot topic created by you... a user with nearly 3 whole posts... a user who joined this community like almost 2 hours ago. 

Damnit! Well done, Nancy Drew. Sherlock’s got nothing on you. I humbly submit to your clearly superior intellect.

No offense, but go away moron. ✌️

Edited July 12, 2020 by iNow

[CharonY]

  

6 minutes ago, iNow said:

No offense, but go away moron. ✌️

!

Moderator Note

Please refrain from using personal insults, even in response to inane accusations/posts. I know at least one of your sockpuppets is better than this.

 

 

28 minutes ago, IDoNotCare said:

Do you think you deserve a home and another does not? Because you're a bootlicker? Like it or not war is coming and your only way out is Venus Project. 

!

Moderator Note

If you want to argue, please do so without insulting people. Also, stating opinion as facts is not a good argument, it is soapboxing. If you want to make specific arguments, make them here and structure them in a way that allows a discussion. If all you want to say is visit this website and if you do not agree with me, I am going to throw insults, then this is not the right place for you.

 

[swansont]

“We will automate everything” is a pipe dream.

1. For processes where it was cheaper to automate, it would have already happened.

2. Some things we are trying to automate and are finding that it’s very hard (see:self-driving cars)

3. Things like R&D will likely never be automated 

 

Also, if you want to propose communism, you need to not only draw a path of how to get there, but also how you will avoid the catastrophes observed in previous attempts

[Endy0816]

@IDoNotCare Sorry if you're feeling attacked but you need to be able to summarize(and no I'm not a sock puppet). Nobody can read minds here. I might hazard a guess that you're talking about a post scarcity society and more specifically 'fully automated luxury communism', but you need to spell that out. Without a good reason to, nobody wants to sit through a bunch of YouTube videos or go offsite to a random link.

 

5 hours ago, swansont said:

“We will automate everything” is a pipe dream.

1. For processes where it was cheaper to automate, it would have already happened.

2. Some things we are trying to automate and are finding that it’s very hard (see:self-driving cars)

3. Things like R&D will likely never be automated 

 

Also, if you want to propose communism, you need to not only draw a path of how to get there, but also how you will avoid the catastrophes observed in previous attempts

In some cases there is just an initial investment hump that automation has to be pushed over. Admittedly communist countries also tend to nationalize simultaneously, which is a great way to kill outside investment. I think we'll at least see automated trucks. For long-hauls along a highway it would be simple enough. Even if legally they end up needing a truck tender, you could find someone cheaper than a full time driver.

At it's heart most R&D boils down to an optimization problem, so algorithms can work for some things. We might still need either a person or possibly a well trained AI, to define problem constraints.

I don't think work will be truly eliminated but it might be more of what people actually like or want to dedicate themselves to.

[Area54]

13 hours ago, IDoNotCare said:

Why aren't more people talking about it? This needs to be done. We should have had the Projects like these housing our poor DECADES AGO. Why? I'm asking the members here, why? 

I will not attempt to answer that particular 'why', but I will offer you a plausible explanation as to why your thoughts have been generally dismissed by other forum members. In no particular order:

• You have failed to provide a concise and coherent explanation of your proposal.
• You have made many assertions, but have offered no meaningful support for those assertions.
• Your posts have seemed belligerent, discourteous and at times hysterical
• You have not been attentive to replies

Your proposals may have much value and even be the correct way forward, however emotional rants will never be as effective as rational argument. I recommend organising your thoughts, presenting them in a simple, straightforward manner, and toning down on the patronising agression. Of course, if you don't really want to convince anyone, then keep doing what you are doing.

[IDoNotCare]

13 hours ago, swansont said:

“We will automate everything” is a pipe dream.

1. For processes where it was cheaper to automate, it would have already happened.

2. Some things we are trying to automate and are finding that it’s very hard (see:self-driving cars)

3. Things like R&D will likely never be automated 

 

Also, if you want to propose communism, you need to not only draw a path of how to get there, but also how you will avoid the catastrophes observed in previous attempts

1.     Another example of the Free Trade Catastrophe – the safest and most reliable product isn’t sold solely, not when they have all these sub-par products to sale! People will buy what they know; it is the work of free trade to employ salespeople to fool them. It’s one big circle. The bigger issue is how frivolous we are with money, and allowed to be. It’s killing us, and all money is good for is running out so desperation can mask incentive. Now that’s not accountability, is it?  Self-autonomy is possible, that’s an engineering question and it’s covered heavily in Jacque Fresco’s work. It’s not like they aren’t using the scientific method here, they are more likely to deliver than anything our government is doing when they build their projects. They are planning on testing these self-autonomous projects. It’s actually highly pragmatic;

 

2.     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__EoOvVkEMo Do you mean this self-driving car? We could have had flying cars quite some time ago, this is one of the older and more seamless ones: http://randolphlalonde.blogspot.com/2012/09/wheres-my-flying-car-broadcast-4-one.html But there is better technology employed in Venus Project designs which are clearly laid out for those members who wish to do a little extra research and I will provide their maglev vactrain, subterranean, transcontinental, which connects not just a city but the world at large using 2% of the cost of the fuel planes use as a public transportation system. He also has self-driving cars but they work a little differently than those limited by disorganized roadways and overall inefficient traffic system. They run on what one could call “smartroads” which is like the smartphone to the phone. Wow, don’t you just love putting the modern scheme out of business with a Venus City? But now with molecular replication and mechanical DNA devices I’m convinced that a vonn neumonn probe could just mine the crust into a planet swarming, within every inch, with self-autonomous systems.

 

3.     That’s the point; we want more engineers and less public service and sales, we want to make it so no monotonous job is possible to get.

 

“Also, if you want to propose communism” WHHHHAA—I didn’t say that. I know it’s custom throw communism at ideas that you don’t like but I said that modern politics are more similar to communism than an RBE if anything. You have to pump money into the system, but you are not all allowed education. That’s communism, that’s the Left, that’s the Right, that’s universal in all countries. You HAVE to pay taxes. You see an RBE is so radically liberating that none of these are requirements enforced by gunpoint. I regress, we aren’t forced to work at gunpoint directly because they trick you, you see, they knock off Maslow’s first tier of most basic needs and then get a criminal to resist so they can kill ‘em. That’s far more similar to communism than an RBE, that’s capitalism. If ownership were such an issue to the point where you have to barter with your government for basic needs you’d think that Murrrcah! should employ the communistic method of limiting the population so housing isn’t such an issue but unfortunately our system falls short of communism in that regard. The          Venus Project proposes the idea of usership instead, wherein basic needs are provided and a headcount of projected population growth is accounted for in time to provide it instead of limiting the population, another case where an RBE is more unlike communism and yet better. We don’t actually own anything, not a single piece of that thing, and neither does our government, and it’s just there. If a basic necessity is needed to be used we have what’s called usership, no need to own anything because there’s plenty to go around. The wonders of modern technology handled intelligently and considerately instead of thrown in the trash because of free trade’s lack of accountability.

 

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

20 hours ago, IDoNotCare said:

Will you and your two alternate accounts stop trying to draw away from the topic of discussion PLEASE?

Anyway a self-autonomous socioeconomic grid has never been done before, this is HUGE. Why aren't more people talking about it? This needs to be done. We should have had the Projects like these housing our poor DECADES AGO. Why? I'm asking the members here, why? 

Well I'll tell you why, every single person under the upper middle class would migrate into these projects. Normally when we think of projects we think ghetto, but these are NICE. No one, and I mean no one, would support GM anymore, the wealthy, everyone above the middle middle class would vanish. And rich people do like their servants. 

We need to not occupy wallstreet, we need the police to step aside and let us give to those who have it coming to them. I bet another half-decade like this and you will see a civilian coalition of impoverished start taking homes and giving home owners the boot. We will outnumber them anyway. The situation grows more serious than you and your alts might think. It might be me kicking you out of your own home, I'm a fighter, are you? Have you ever been in a real fight to death? 

Do you think you deserve a home and another does not? Because you're a bootlicker? Like it or not war is coming and your only way out is Venus Project. I would say they should have arrested me for attacking them. But I can collate just as well with inmates. 

Can we please stop piling on with the neg reps to this? One is enough. Especially when a mod, for good reason, has pointed out why it is unacceptable.

Allow the poster to adjust if they are able.

Thanks.

[IDoNotCare]

46 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Can we please stop piling on with the neg reps to this? One is enough. Especially when a mod, for good reason, has pointed out why it is unacceptable.

Allow the poster to adjust if they are able.

Thanks.

I am not concerned about the reputation points I just didn't like INow going from zero to 100 or the constant attention being drawn away from the actual Venus Project. You see what frustrates me the most is how great an RBE is and how little attention it gets by sheeple.

[J.C.MacSwell]

7 minutes ago, IDoNotCare said:

I am not concerned about the reputation points I just didn't like INow going from zero to 100 or the constant attention being drawn away from the actual Venus Project. You see what frustrates me the most is how great an RBE is and how little attention it gets by sheeple.

Resource based economy?

[iNow]

19 minutes ago, IDoNotCare said:

I am not concerned about the reputation points I just didn't like INow going from zero to 100 or the constant attention being drawn away from the actual Venus Project.

I will surely be shedding copious tears into my pillow tonight thanks to your disapproval. Have you no decency, sir?

On another note, for someone who picked the username “I do not care,” you sure do seem to care quite a bit about some rather trite trivial sh-tuff...

[IDoNotCare]

4 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Resource based economy?

Yes, originally in the first post I tried to highlight the benefits juxtaposed to how bad things are so I could paint a picture of how good they could.

It's been an issue since I read about The Venus Project over 12 years ago in highschool and how the best option is the least supported or least known in the public eye. It's either a common first reaction of something sounding too good to be true or it's deliberately suppressed, Jacque Fresco himself had been working on these ideas, such as the energy efficient maglev vactube trains and smartroads since the 70s so I am very frustrated by the lack of deadlines this Venus Project still, obviously companies such as GM and other big corporations could provide some push but I didn't progress would be slow I mean for something so practical and, let's face it, liberating you'd think they wouldn't need to build parks just to be heard by the public. It's ridiculous, this is something often refered to as a utopia, and now there's more rioting than ever for the same causes as I've highlighted in this thread which just of these projects could cure, but we're rioting about symptoms involving race and not over class warfare. Which is even more frustrating.

1 minute ago, iNow said:

I will surely be shedding copious tears into my pillow tonight thanks to your disapproval. Have you no decency, sir?

On another note, for someone who picked the username “I do not care,” you sure do seem to care quite a bit about some rather trite trivial sh-tuff...

Homelessness is trivial now? I couldn't think of a username so I wrote I don't care. 

So what one member can neg multiple posts here? Lol, iNow is just going to run around negging any post arbitrarily because he is temperamental. Oh well, that's just a web design problem because stuff like that is bound to happen when you have members like that.

[CharonY]

3 minutes ago, IDoNotCare said:

So what one member can neg multiple posts here? Lol, iNow is just going to run around negging any post arbitrarily because he is temperamental. Oh well, that's just a web design problem because stuff like that is bound to happen when you have members like that.

!

Moderator Note

If you stop focusing on rep you will have a much better time here. Also note that everyone can neg a post only once and the member in question has provided only one negative vote. Again, focusing on posts rather than on poster is generally a much better approach and this is true for everyone involved.

 

[zapatos]

Despite the objections of some you deserve all the neg reps you get. Quit your whining and insulting behavior or your time here will be short.

[IDoNotCare]

3 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Despite the objections of some you deserve all the neg reps you get. Quit your whining and insulting behavior or your time here will be short.

Looks like someone needs some kool-aid.

Thannks for chiming in but the constant berating, ban threats carried out by non-admins, and character assassinations are just derailing this thread about THE VENUS PROJECT and are very opinionated and off-topic. 

[ALine]

I believe that I have seen the venus project before, from my understanding it is based around the concept of a "resource based economy" where the economic trade and value distribution is primarily based around the number of resources currently available at any given time.

Ex: The development of a car would be valued at the amount of steel or metal which would be used to form that car instead of value based economics which is dependent on supply and demand.

I would need to look back on it again to make sure thought.

p.s. need to go back and read through the posts to gain a better understanding of the discussion, give me a minute.

[iNow]

21 minutes ago, IDoNotCare said:

So what one member can neg multiple posts here? Lol, iNow is just going to run around negging any post arbitrarily because he is temperamental.

I don’t recall neg repping you, but responses like this really motivate me to more seriously consider doing so

[IDoNotCare]

1 minute ago, ALine said:

I believe that I have seen the venus project before, from my understanding it is based around the concept of a "resource based economy" where the economic trade and value distribution is primarily based around the number of resources currently available at any given time.

Ex: The development of a car would be valued at the amount of steel or metal which would be used to form that car instead of value based economics which is dependent on supply and demand.

I would need to look back on it again to make sure thought.

p.s. need to go back and read through the posts to gain a better understanding of the discussion, give me a minute.

Thank you for focusing on the topic at hand but an RBE doesn't just account for the materials but assembly and transportation as well but in automated unmanned systems controlled by an operator (operating jobs that can be done at home in a very large network of operators worldwide preferably) in my version of it. The idea is to remove currency altogether and instead account for what will be needed.

The extent of training for an operator would be knowing how all the intricate machinery functions, and then it's like playing a video game with drone technologies. A single household could build ten more while at the same time upgrading their own facilities. Adding a mall of storage to their back yard or recreational facilities. We have this technology let's build a grid.