Discuss the design, implementation and your suggestions in relation to the Equal Money System.
“Every problem you have stated in the opinion above is addressed by the
ZM, not as fixed or dogmatic but as an ongoing conversation about those
subjects. The ZM has as its primary goal the education of the population
of the world into a sustainable future, by the realization that existing
systems do not work and in fact cause most of the unsustainable factors,
and science has already discovered means to create a sustainable future.
It's all about how people think.
We choose to go with science, because it seems to give the most reliable
working data. After all, Science is the study of Nature, and that is the
direction of human survival.”
“We consider almost everything else to be irrelevant. There are people of
all religions in the ZM. “
“The first movie Peter made, Zeitgeist: The Movie, was his personal art
project before he met Jacque Fresco and the Zeitgeist Movement started.
The movies after that gives data as to why we have come to the
conclusions we have. But the movies are only a tiny part of the Movement,
with the ongoing conversation being far more important.”
“We are not about cities... that is just showing what is technologically
possible for everyone on the planet, if they choose to live in cities...
if they don't, that's fine too, and what we are about is making it
possible for everyone on the planet to have vastly better than their
survival necessities, and do it without even wage slavery, AND do it
without ecological destruction. No livingry is discounted or ignored.
Weaponry, on the other hand is absolutely rejected.”
“We are all about the basic causes that are starving a billion people on
this planet. We are all about changing the human behavior that is causing
the ecology, which is our common outer body, to disintegrate. And we are
all about people choosing to self-educate to understand how humanity can
live on this planet with a freedom and prosperity which exceeds all past
“We are not about Utopia, which cannot exist, or forcing people in any
way, or causing or supporting revolution... we are not about arguing,
either, because we really don't have to do that. The planetary situation
does our arguing for us. The survival impulse is a paradigm shift that is
global and includes everyone. We are a result of that, and all we have is
a set of ideas and information that is one option for human survival. It
is certainly not the only option although we can see that violence and
revolution will never produce the change we want to see.”
“And we are not monolithic, or following a dogma or the leadership of
anyone. Jacque Fresco is a 94 year old visionary who we respect and
listen to, but there is no 'power' in that since we will not force or
intimidate anyone. Peter is a talented filmmaker with a gift of
explaining complex subjects and a loving heart, and he 'owns' the main
zeitgeist site, but he is simply another respected voice in the movement,
he is not 'leader' to anyone in the movement who fully understand what we
“Going from a few people to 500,000 people all over the planet in about
two years means we are growing fast, and members are at all levels of
understanding. This means that we have a wide diversity of opinions and
ideas which people develop and run with, within our basic understanding
of 'Do No Harm'. We are trying to bring about a change of mind, and
therefore action, for a world with 6+ billion people and we want to have
that change be as peaceful as the maturing of any human being going from
childhood into adulthood, and since only a good means can create a good
result, it must be peaceful, through voluntary self-education.”
“While many think that is impossible, science seems to show that it is,
and we can do it. We know it is a long term project, which might take
more than one generation, but it must be done right or the result will
not be good.”
“We cannot live with the knowledge that our civilization is starving
billions, slaughtering thousands, and obliterating our ecology when we,
along with all the other people in the world conscious of that, have some
idea of what to do about it.”
“You are always welcome to check into us more at
http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com We also have a Teamspeak server so we
can have voice conversations about the ZM and it's goals and methods.”
matejvarga wrote today at 9:33 AM
The ideals are worthless and Zeitgeist movement is just a compromise between current system and Equal Money System, it cannot work because MInd is abusive in its nature thats what they do not realize. And Science is not a holy grail, it is just a tool how we can actually make things better, e.g. cold fusion instead of the oil and so on but its not the holy grail.
(Anonymous) (126.96.36.199) wrote:
Feb. 1st, 2011 02:53 pm (local)
“More research needed
**I'm not leaving this comment to attack you in any way. I just don't want others to read this and think it is accurate”
“You don't understand the movement. It is not a utopia like you and many many others have stated. It will not be some people living in the cities and others in mud. We understand that this will only work if these ideas are applied holistically.”
“Many of the criticisms you have are addressed on TVP/TZM websites, and ironically, agree with you in some cases. I suggest you research the Venus Project more thoroughly. Watching the movies is only the very tip of the iceberg. Find some of Jacque's lecture videos online. Operate scientifically, use critical thinking.
Have a great life! “
I've been following the information presented by the zeitgeist movement
for about a year, and I happened upon your journal through my google
alerts about it.
I just wanted to mention to you that your points about building super
cities while billions of people starve is bang on, but what you're
missing about the intent of the movement altogether is that we know that
nothing like that has ever been tried before.. so to build one is just
the first stage.”
“If it all takes off and it all happens, it's with the
full intent of spreading ready and easy access to housing and food for
everyone in the human civilization, so long as it's their desire to
“With the application of things like vertical hydroponic
farming and the like, food could be produced in such abundance that those
who are going without now, could be helped from afar, at the same time as
developing similar technologies local to the people who are suffering so
they can have the means right in their own backyard.”
“It's a global
movement, which is why there is no push to fundraise and build the
happytime future city for the zeitgeist-minded people to go off to and
live happily ever after while everyone else goes without.”
there's one place that DOES figure out how to take care of themselves,
and the shit hits the fan in the next town over, the people from that
town will come to try to take their share anyways. That's why it'd never
work to do all of that in isolation.”
“And also, an aside, everything in Jacque Fresco's drawings and concepts
is very possible to do today.. we just, as a society, choose not to,
because there's more money in decay than a lasting infrastructure. What
happens to all the plumbers jobs when the pipes are built to last? Much
better to keep the economy going with halfassed stuff”
“Speaking of Haiti, I, and many, many others like me, I'm sure would be
thrilled to go down there and help with the cleanup and restoration
efforts, but can't, because we're busy with tedious jobs so we can make
the money to cover rent at home.”
“I just can't see how giving everyone the same amount of meaningless
pieces of paper, or 1's and 0's in a digital bank account is going to fix
anything. Especially in areas where there IS no work, there are no jobs,
and they'd spend all their 'equal money', some food company would take it
all, give them a month's worth, and then we'd be back where we started.”
“I must say i love you! i read the whole thing with this huge smile on my
face. You are correct. And what's so funny about it is that what you say
is exactly what The Zeitgeist Movement tries to point out to the public
and its member. The basic, single most important and first step is to
change the values of people today, to re-educate. That’s exactly what
Zeitgeist is talking about.
This is what is said in Zeitgeist: Addendum (the second film): "We must
mobilize and educate everyone about the inherent corruption of our
current world system. Along with the only true sustainable solution:
Declaring all the natural resources on the planet as the common heritage
to all people.[...]
The choice lies with you. You can continue to be a slave under the
current system, and see endless wars, depressions and injustice across
the globe while play-kidding yourself with vain entertainment and
materialistic garbage. Or, you can focus your energy on true, lasting,
holistic change. Which actually has the realistic ability to support and
free humans, with no-one left behind. But, in the end, the most relevant
change must first occur inside of you. The real revolution is the
revolution of consciousness and each one of us first needs to eliminate
the diversionary, materialistic noise we have been conditioned to think
is true. While discovering, amplifying and aligning with the signal,
coming from our true, empirical oneness. It is up to you." - Peter Joseph
1:55:47 to 1:57:13 Zeitgeist: Addendum”
“You are a wonderful human and the world needs more that thinks like you.
It would be amazing if someone like you helped us to create a better
world for everyone. Please look further into Zeitgeist and the Venus
Project to fully understand them, I'm sorry to say it but 2h and 40 min
can't explain a whole new way of thinking and a whole new society.
Please contact me and ask me anything if you have any question or want to
discuss the subject”
//David - member of The Zeitgeist Movement for 2 years, thinking and
fighting for all the starving humans in the world”
rangeoshun wrote:@MarlenLife Ok, if you work for 4 years, then you get the starter pack, or you'll get your 'basic' needs met for the time you live? Like old people supposed now days. So, we'll be under pressure, to produce more people, who will work for this 4 years. In our ageing society, it doesn't look good. Will everybody enterprise after their turn? What can they loose? Who will calculate what worth what? If automation will take place, only the regime will be, or the dirty jobs too?
rangeoshun wrote:So building with out money, is a nonsans?
How can you say that after you said we do not born with money? If we were not born with it, people long before, born with out it, but still built houses. A lot of houses, with some infrastructure equals cities.
But my "big":) question would be, if you have money, how do you want to give people equally? A cleaning lady will earn as much as a teacher? How do you want to evaluate what job worths what money? What job can and can't be automated? So if you have money, because in my terms I say money as we say it now, and if I understood you, you use it almost the same way, except, you share it "equally". But not equally after all, because you have to work for it, and here goes back the question, what jobs worth what money?
to have a world without a form of management and administration of resources on a numerical value basis
rangeoshun wrote:to have a world without a form of management and administration of resources on a numerical value basis
Than your implying that the fully automated system wouldn't have management, or doesn't administrate resources on a numerical value basis. If it's automated, it can not do anything else than the above, hence it is called a computer.
But how will you make people a good job, because we're talking about jobs here, that aren't necessarily the same as profession, in the sense that you do not have to like it, but you have to do it. You still might easily end up doing something you do not like. So you won't make a good job. So you are fired. Or you just do barely enough to get threw. This IS better indeed, this would be better at least for now. So my point is, you'll still have unsatisfied people, doing crappy jobs, just for the sake of surviving.
The other part, is what can, and what can't we automate. We could virtually automate anything, that we want to, but if you draw a line, than you say, we can't progress any further in this or that. Because the ultimate progression means to get as good as possible. So the best things will almost have your lifespan or more, and it will be produced by machines, unless you say you want to make your own, to get to the highest efficiency. In a resource based economy you have to get that. Or else it's not a resource based economy, but a resource based economy that is bad, and still puts people to places, where they don't want to be.
So unemployment is the side effect of being as efficient as one can, we have to address the problem of unemployment. So once again just to be clear, ether you make up jobs to give to people, or you'll end up to need only a limited number of people. What's up with that?
If i choose to be, or just happen to be out of my jobs, what will happen? I get money, or don't? By the way, the only links i can find whit the keyword of unemployment, on the equalmoney.org site, is when someone righteously slandering the current system, and says it's a side effect of only that.
But it's ironically also correlated, to how efficient our society is. And if you'll end up everyone out of a job, still assuming you do not want to make just up some, to put those poor bastards somewhere, you'll get a few, who could be elected, or rather selected by they're achievements in adding to society. So we finally arrive, to the Venus answer of the question, where people can have equal "money", or rather as they need, in the form of the best possible material things, produced by the best possible worker that time and level of technology.
rangeoshun wrote:So as I understand,basically the only things separating the two ideas, Zeitgeist and Equal Money, is the fact that you are required by the system to work for 4 years, to contribute to society in a job that is still necessary to have human oversee, and the distribution of goods will be threw this equal money. Till this point I can see how it could be implemented in a fully automated system also, as a limit for the individual.
But I don't have to read more to ask this right now, but i assure you I will later, If I choose not to work, will I get the same money, as people who work? If it's equal, it just doesn't matter who, everyone is equal. How do you get people to work at all? If you do not manage to do this, you'll end up needing more people as I mentioned earlier, and it's an assumption based on logic. So you assume at this point people will want to work. That's something that also could be implemented in a fully automated system, just for the individuals how still require some sort of 'everyday hobby'.
In my proposals I don't have equality, in a 'no matter what you'll get the same amount' equality. It's an equality is in 'equal resources to everyone'. Because equality is not represented in peoples needs, as they are different, hence not equal. At this point I assume, no, I believe, that greed is because of the 'fight or die' system. When you can take anything, and virtually as many you can carry, why would you take it? You realize you do not need these right now, you can come back for them later, for example a means for a social interaction, you could do it with friends.
I've gotten this same comment on 'people's needs' in the Paradise Cities video today - and it's one load of bullshit really.
How can you say people have 'different needs'?
Don't you eat?
Don't you require a roof over your head?
Don't you require water?
Don't you require proper public services?
Don't you require health-care?
Don't you require MONEY to Survive in this world?
'BeLIEving' implies faith
'taking all you can' is based on the same system that has created scarcity
Complete equality is bullshit. You can't say, people need the same, and saying everyone else who think different in these manners, that they just make things up, and tell bullshit. Complete equality is a fairytale, since we know we simply have different needs, have different capablebilities. We are equal in the sense, nobody deserves less then the other. Not meaning, they couldn't need less
rangeoshun wrote:Complete equality is bullshit. You can't say, people need the same, and saying everyone else who think different in these manners, that they just make things up, and tell bullshit.
Complete equality is a fairytale, since we know we simply have different needs, have different capablebilities.
We are equal in the sense, nobody deserves less then the other. Not meaning, they couldn't need less
I think what he means is for example:
An adult tall person will need more food then a smaller one.
This rather inarticulate "comment" can only come from a perspective that is anti-human and savagely mean-spirited.
No limits = Free Will which opens up doors for further abuse and corruption obviously.
Suggest you participate here with the responsibility it is entailed within the nature of the topics we're discussing upon
Yes, for example, but we could go on and on. But thank you for explaining! I thought if here was talked about common sense this was in that category.
This rather inarticulate "comment" can only come from a perspective that is anti-human and savagely mean-spirited.
Stating a fact in this rather inarticulate manner was the last point when everybody has missed my points, but YOU are talking about this, I don't. It isn't anti-human, if YOU don't understand it as better or worth. Just different I mean, and as we are different, we might have the same kind of needs, but the quantity is different; the value is different for each and one of us, and that's a point to consider when you just blindly talk about Equality. Equal chances, equal rights, witch means human equality in law terms.
Well, here my point would be, you simply can't build a better world, such as in your theory, if people do not want this. If you do not have free will, yes, you might never see that "door", and that's called dictatorship, but to have a better world you have to have free will to choose not to cross that door. And in a better world, you won't because it will not grant you any advantages, so you simply won't corrupt, because it would be stupid.
Ok, than tell me where to read please about the working people and not working people difference, in terms of money. I have a serious problem with this part. And it's very important part.
And if there is a difference as Ann mentioned, there is a serious need for jobs to everyone. In case everyone decides to work. But I do not see how could that be, in respect to the technological progression we have now. And if you choose to "make up jobs", that means on some fields deliberately to not to use the machines we could, than you do not have efficiency, or better said you loose efficiency as you expand these fields. In this case, basically you withhold the better world, as you force people to work once more, just for different reasons as now. That's nowhere the optimal, except if you want to take free will. If you do you simply degrade people to a "happy machine" level. But know, that the free will you are not found of, is the one force that will change the world.
uniqueness in value
What's best for all IS what's best for all - this obviously implies that people 'Not wanting this' are obviously trying to preserve a way/ a door open to abuse and harm others, hence that's unacceptable - therefore free will exists in this world at this stage simply as a way to harm/abuse others and claiming it to be a 'human right' to do so.
What we are creating here is Not just 'theory', it's being lived and applied already at an individual level
We haven't said 'No' to technology, that's yet another assumption in fact.
What is exactly your problem - full disclosure about the point so that we can clarify what requires to be clarified.
rangeoshun wrote:NO! Missed to understand again. It is the "value" of things in respect to the individuals needs. So this is not for people, it's for peoples choices, to what to do whit their money. And that should be common sense But to not to let your minds wonder, tampons almost worth nothing to me, but for a female fellow human being they might worth a lot more, if she prefers them obviously over other methods. This is not a mean joke this time, just simple fact.
That's a rather miserable stand point of view. And cynical in fact.
If that would be true, there wouldn't be prejudice against domestic groups and such, but my point was, the system it self doesn't exist yet, not every point is ready to apply, and the most importantly, until we make it happen, and see where it goes, until than it's just a theory.
I didn't say you said no, but rather "if" you did, and why you should, if you want to give jobs to EVERYONE.
If you do not work, you'll get the basics, OK. But to have equal resources you have to work an equal amount. So you'll end up making something that's virtually meaningless /maintenance/, because you do something that a machine could do, and it would do a lot better. And that's the "FORCING" I talked about. And there has to be unlimited supply of jobs, or else, there is competition, and somebody will end up having less.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest