Simviation Forums

I noticed that it has been a while since we had a decent poll thread down here, so here's a good one, and hopefully some interesting debate will accompany it.



A friend and myself were debating whether or not humanity could survive without money.

He insists that it's hardwired into human nature to need to attain things of value or sentiment, and that will always involve currency of one kind or another.

I say it's possible for us to overcome this and work for the betterment of humanity. Granted it will probably take an apocalypse and a total reevaluation of what's really important in life for it to ever happen which should only take, say several hundred years and a comet collision or a super volcano or such.

Just wondered what others thought of this amazingly powerful item called money, and  whether or not we could do without it, now or ever.

Enjoy, and leave god & government out of this one please. 

We did it 10,000 years ago, so its a definite yes. But it was probably a piss poor existence.

I will say no. Even before money exsited there was a Tribal thing called cooperation. Sharing your kill with others, knowing that they would share, when they were fortunate.
I think that was the very beginnings of Monetary exchange.
Look where we are now.

If you don't include bartering, than yes.

It's all about comprehending time. Ants, Rats, Birds, even our pets don't think about how what they do today, will effect what happens to them tomorrow. All they think about, is

Going beyond those things requires long-term, abstract thought.. and that requires language (ever notice how you think in words ?)

I actually wrote a paper arguing why that cannot possibly be the case 

Being the moderate socialist that I am, I say yes.  Of course in a world without any form of capital would take getting used to, I think that it would be the better choice for everyone.  I think that everyone should get an equal amount of wealth that they can do whatever with. 

If you've ever read Edward Bellamy's novel "Looking Backward" you'll know what I'm talking about.  

Could civilization live without money? You may be able to if you were completely independent, self sufficient, and could survive without depending on anyone for anything, but that would be impossible in today's modern world because nobody could become completely self sufficient.

Even before people used currency, people bartered and traded goods or services for other goods or services.


[quote]Being the moderate socialist that I am, I say yes.

Going beyond those things requires long-term, abstract thought.. and that requires language (ever notice how you think in words ?)

I actually wrote a paper arguing why that cannot possibly be the case

[quote]Being the moderate socialist that I am, I say yes.

Could we live without money, well here is a thought, who will service you holiday flight at 02:30 in the AM when the rain is coming down sideways and it is colder than a frog's knob. Without renumeration, it will not be me, so no holiday.
No money, I'll scratch your back, if you scratch mine only works for the handful of hippies who live in a commune and grow their own.
It is in man's heart to kill and want and in some parts of the world, if you want, then you kill. The rest of us through laws manage to get by without the killing part, but the urge to want and want better or more is what makes man progress. SimV is an example. We are never satisfied with our computers because they cannot run FSX how we would like them too, so, by the very nature we want the next one that can. If we where satisfied and content and did not have any wants then we would all by playing battleships with pen and paper.

Matt

In an ideal Marxist utopia it would be possible. However the problem is people

Could we live without money, well here is a thought, who will service you holiday flight at 02:30 in the AM when the rain is coming down sideways and it is colder than a frog's knob

A better question would be.. Where would the airplane, and all of its advance systems have come from.. if people hadn't accumulated, and pooled wealth to form all the corporations that manufactured it all.. right down to the two-part, epoxy paint ?

Wow, I wasn't expecting the results to be that even.  8-)

As cheesy as this sounds, my idea of that society without money is based loosely on the principals of how they live in the world of Star Trek. 

Without changing any of our past or present events, I think we could eventually learn to live without money & wealth, but it would need to be replaced with some other need of equal or greater importance than money has now.

I suppose this type of society would have to have done away with disease, famine, poverty, and gross social classing of citizens.

The need to get 'things' for doing things is a fundamental flaw of human nature, and why I think we can't get along as a world community.
Every now and then, you get to see glimpses of contradiction to that nature.  Here at Simv for example, we help one another without ever expecting anything in return.
Freeware designers spend hundreds of hours on their projects and then present them to the public without expecting anything in return.

Small scale yes, but imagine that kind of selflessness brought to a world stage.

Another thing that would have to disappear is commercialism.  That is the single driving factor behind most populations today I think. 
Can you go anywhere or use anything that is not in someway touched by the fingers of commercialism?  Unless you live in the desert and made everything you have by hand, it's very doubtful. We're conditioned from birth to want the best, and do what it takes to get it.

The need to get 'things' for doing things is a fundamental flaw of human nature

It's more a byproduct of the spirit in human nature, that sets us above the 'animals'.

Ponder a perfectly functional commune. Everything in balance.. everyone providing according to their ability.. everyone taking according to their needs.

THEN some idiot wonders what's on the other side of those mountains. In order for him to satisfy that spirit.. he'd have to not only disrupt the commune's balance.. he'd have to TAKE some of the communal wealth on the journey.

It boils down to liberty. The only way for HIM to decide for HIMSELF what to do, is if he had accumulated some wealth of his own..  Else the commune decides FOR him   ;)