Telmo, 
An economic system that frees humanity from unnecessary suffering and meaningless work
–
This is a relatively old problem for humanity, but that has been gaining new nuances with each major wave of innovation: the agricultural revolution (arguably where the problem really started), then the industrial revolution and currently the computer revolution.
The problem in its current form is this: humanity possesses both the resources and technology to provide basic necessities to everyone in the planet: housing, food, water and basic medical care. However, the current economic system does not create incentives for this to happen, and there are many other social and cultural impediments. An important point is this: it is a social, not a technological problem.
Of course it is hard to consider this problem without discussing some famous attempts. I will list some obvious ones, while trying to avoid ideological discussions -- one of the social impediments that gets in the way addressing this issue rationally. Of course, this is a highly simplistic summary:
-
Marxism / Communism appears to have failed due to removing incentives for people to work. Extreme collectivism appears to eventually lead to brutal repression, because the only way to survive is then to force people to do what the collective needs.
-
Contemporary Capitalism appears to be collapsing under increasing inequality. Once a small fraction of the population amasses a significant portion of the resources, it becomes capable of creating international organizations that both transcend and dictate local laws, effectively side-stepping democracy.
Proponents of both Marxism, Capitalism and other systems -- let's consider an abstract ideology X -- typically use the argument that what failed was not "true X". "True X" would solve all the problems. Upon examination, "True X" always seems to assume perfect people acting in good faith.
Is it possible to devise a system that does not require ideal humans to work?
We are currently stuck in a situation where resource distribution is done through jobs. The problem is that, as technology progresses, more and more jobs become obsolete. It appears that we are already in a situation where the adult population vastly outnumbers the number of real jobs available. Social scientists are pointing out the phenomena of "bullshit jobs" -- an increasing number of unnecessary and meaningless jobs that are created to maintain social stability. This is tragic: people are being imprisoned for large chunks of their lives simply because there is no sane way of redistributing wealth.
Another unsustainable aspect of the current economic system is its reliance on growth. It is trivial to conclude that infinite growth cannot be maintained in a finite environment, and it is also trivial to observe how destructive this position is to the environment. One simple illustration of this is the phenomena of "planned obsolescence". As with bullshit jobs, planned obsolescence consumes real resources to achieve the abstract aim of economic stability.
How to create the incentives for people to cooperate, maintain scientific and technological progress, increase individual freedom and reduce unnecessary suffering? Can such a system be imagined without falling for the "perfect human beings" trap?
Public self-explanatory, inter-lingual, financial, programmable, hierarchical think-tank
Tiesą sakant, visos įmonės vykdo savo verslą kaip įvesties / išvesties procesus, kurie yra labai matomi dabartinėje bankų sistemoje. Manau, šis klausimas gali būti labai susijęs su apskaitos sistema, kurią žmonija naudoja. Kas apibrėžė ir toliau apibrėžia, kaip mes turėtume apskaityti dalykus ir kaip tai iš naujo apibrėžti - gal tai pagalvojus, galima pasiekti vaisingų rezultatų? Yra daug laiko, kuris neapskaitytas, ir daug darbo, kuris tenka įmonėms, gaunant piniginius atlygius, tačiau be teisingos tų įmonių nuosavo kapitalo dalies, lygiavertės ir proporcingos darbo rezultatams. Žmonių darbo rezultatai laikomi „pirktomis ir įsigytomis prekėmis“, o ne tuo, kas didžiąja dalimi lieka darbuotojo ar rangovo nuosavybė. Aš turiu omenyje tai, kad jei darbdaviui už darbą mokama tik tam, kad jis gautųsi, tada mes padengėme tik laiko sąnaudas, o tai reiškia, kad darbuotojas investavo gautus pinigus kaip laiką, o tai reiškia, kad šiuo atveju darbuotojas turėtų turi 50% to sukurto rezultato. Sistema, kurią iš tikrųjų paaiškinu vaizdo įraše, tačiau yra demonstracinė versija skaičiuoklė.
In fact, all companies run their businesses as I/O processes, that are very visible in the current banking system. I think, the issue may lie very much in the accounting system, that humanity uses. Who defined and continues to define how we should account things, and how to redefine that -- maybe thinking of that may lead to some fruitful results? There's a lot of time that goes unaccounted, and a lot of work, that goes to companies, with monetary rewards, but without a fair share of the equity into those companies, equivalent and proportional to the work results. The results of the people's work are considered "commodity bought and owned", not something that remains in large part the employee's or contractor's ownership. What I mean is if the employer is paid for the work just to get by, then we only covered the costs of the time, which means, that the employee invested the money received as time, which means that in this case, the employee should own 50% of that result created. The system I explain actually in a video, but there is a demo spreadsheet.
[+]
Manau, kad kančia kyla dėl optimizavimo. Ne nuo daiktų kūrimo nuo nulio.
Žmonės samdomi atlikti ataskaitas, kurti ataskaitas ir atlikti analizę. Tai nuobodus darbas.
I think suffering comes from optimisation. Not from building things from scratch.
People are hired to go through reports, create reports and do analysis. It's boring work.
[+]
Ar sugriautas mitas, kad „rinkos ekonomika gali pritaikyti išteklių paskirstymą, kad atitiktų žmonių poreikius“?
“市场经济能够调节资源分配和人的需求相匹配 “的神话破灭了吗？
[+]
Žmonės piktnaudžiauja ir priima savaime suprantamus dalykus, kurie yra nemokami. Taigi manau, kad turėtume būti atsargūs, išrašydami nemokamą medžiagą visiems.
Darbas turėtų būti prasmingas ir jį turėtų valdyti atjaučiantys žmonės. Aš esu antiworko, reddit grupės, skirta žmonėms, dirbantiems minimalaus atlyginimo darbus, pasekėja. Su žmonėmis elgiamasi kaip su robotais, ir su jais taip lengva atsikratyti.
Kai kurie darbai yra sunkus darbas, purvinas, pavojingas, tačiau juos reikia atlikti. Siūlau mokėti daugiau už tokius darbus, kurių niekas nenori daryti. Žmonės neturėtų labai norėti dirbti.
People abuse and take for granted things that are free. So I think we should be careful to prescribe free stuff for everybody.
Work should be meaningful and should be managed by compassionate human beings. I'm a follower of antiwork, a reddit group for people who work in minimum wage jobs. People are treated like robots and disposed of so easily.
Some work is hard work, dirty, dangerous, but needs to be done. I propose we pay more for jobs that are like this, that nobody wants to do. People shouldn't be desperate to do jobs.
Žmonės nemėgsta nemokamai atiduoti savo pertekliaus kitiems žmonėms. Žmonės mano, kad visuomenėje egzistuoja nemokamo krautuvo problema. Jūs turite „užsidirbti pragyvenimui“. Manau, kad tai neteisinga ir neįtikėtinai trumparegiška. Štai tokia vyraujanti pagrindinė nuomonė „aš turiu savo, šūdas visi kiti“.
Žmonės sąmoningai balsuoja, kad pašalintų pašalpas iš kitų, mažiau pasisekusių piliečių. Štai kokia baisi žmogaus prigimtis.
People don't like giving up their surpluses to other people for free. People feel that there is a free loader problem in society. You 'have to earn your living'. I think it's wrong and incredibly short sighted. Theres this prevailing mainstream opinion 'i have got mine, fuck everybody else'.
People deliberately vote to remove benefits from other, less fortunate citizens. That's how terrible human nature is.
// Žmonėms nepatinka nemokamai atiduoti savo perteklių kitiems žmonėms. //
Tai nulinės sumos mentalitetas ir stebėjimo sistemų trūkumas suteiktų jiems grįžtamojo ryšio sistemas už tai, ką jie padarė. Įsivaizduokite, jei kiekvieną auką ir dovanojimą stebėtumėte kiekvieną jūsų idėjos skaitymą ir kiekvieną duomenų gavimą iš saugyklos, ir jūs galėtumėte susieti kažkieno super duper startuolį su idėjomis, kurias asmuo perskaitė iš jūsų tinklaraščio ar saugyklos, kad būtų galima atgauti kreditą iš to paleidimo ir visų kitų sėkmių, kurias įkvėpėte.
Manau, kad pasirinkus turto perdavimo atsekamumo užtikrinimą, informacijos kopijos pagal turto ir informacijos šaltinį gali būti sumažintas „nulinės sumos“ skaičiavimas, nes staiga žmonės ilgai galvotų apie tai, ką jie dalijasi ir ką skaito. Nepaisant to, anoniminės keitimosi informacija rinkos egzistuoja nepriklausomai nuo tokio stebėjimo, šiek tiek panašios į piratinius duomenis, kuriems netaikomi identifikatoriai, net ir turint kažką panašaus į [New IP] (https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2020/discussion-paper -an-the-new-ip-offer-to-the-itu-t/analizė. Tačiau tai neabejotinai turi šalutinį poveikį, lemiantį visuomenės stebėjimą ir privatumo pažeidimą.
Manau, kad tik tai, kad sistemose yra paprastų įrankių ir pasirinktinių galimybių reikalauti skaitymo kvitų ir gauti istorijas su anoniminėmis tapatybėmis, kurios rūpinasi jų įrašais (WoT) sukurtų naują žaidimą, kurį žmonės, besirūpinantys būsimu kreditu, galėtų pasirinkti, o tai galbūt sukeltų naujų socialinių normų.
// People don't like giving up their surpluses to other people for free. //
It's the zero sum mentality, and lack of tracking systems that would give them credit feedback systems for what they did. Imagine if every donation and giving, that every read of your idea and every fetch of data from your repository was tracked by you, and you could connect someone's super-duper startup with the ideas that the person had read from your blog or your repository, making it possible to get back the credit from that startup, and every other success, that you had inspired.
I think the optionality for enforcement of traceability of the transfers of assets copies of information by the source of assets and information, can reduce the "zero sum" calculation, because suddenly people would think long-term about what they share and what they read. Howevertheless, anonymous information exchange markets will exist regardless of such tracking, a bit like pirated data stripped of identifiers, even with something like New IP. However, it certainly has side effects leading to surveillance society and erosion of privacy.
I think, just the actual presence of easy tools and optionality for systems to demand read receipts and fetch histories with anonymous identities that care about their track records (WoT) would create a new game, that people concerned about the future credit could opt to use, and that possibly may lead to new social norms.
Aš sutinku su mintimi, kad bet kuri įstaiga ar bet koks dalykas, kuris buvo būtinas jūsų sėkmei, turėtų būti apdovanotas pelno dalimi.
Turėtume apdovanoti teisingus ir būtinus. Taigi tai reiškia bet kurį darbuotoją, kuris prisideda prie jūsų ar bet kurios paslaugos ar produkto tokiu būdu, kuris pagerino jūsų produkciją.
Aš pavadinau šią idėjos būtinybės grandinę - taksi vairuotojas, vedantis jus į darbo pokalbį ar verslo susitikimą, yra tas, kuris pasirinko jus, o ne ką nors kitą. Jis nusipelno kažko papildomo už savo darbą ir prisidėjimą prie jūsų sėkmės.
Kiekvienas darbuotojas, norėdamas išeiti iš jūsų produkto ar paslaugos, turėtų sutikti su savo pelno sumažinimu.
https://0oo.li/method/59001/chain-of-necessity-or-chain-of-distribution
I agree with the concept that any body or any thing that was necessary for you to succeed should be rewarded a portion of the profits.
We should reward those that are right and those that are necessary. So this means any worker that contributes to you or any service or product on the way that enhanced your output.
I called this idea chain of necessity - that taxi driver that takes you to a job interview or to a business meeting is someone who chose you over someone else. He deserves something extra for his work and contributing toward your success.
Every worker in getting your product or service out the door should agree with his cut of the profits.
https://0oo.li/method/59001/chain-of-necessity-or-chain-of-distribution#1630399963
One idea I had that we should invest in the success ingredients of individuals and share their outputs. I call this baby citizen investment.
https://www.halfbakery.com/idea/Baby_20citizen_20investment
I think the finance industry is corrupt, bloated and not very innovative. It's very self serving and provides very little toward society. The stock market does not reflect on the health of the economy.
However index funds reveal a very important and useful idea of distributing your bets across everybody for success. We should do that with people and projects. Government and other people have a stake in your success and they also contribute to your success. Taxation can be just another chain or necessity or claim on your success.
If it weren't for your government funded education, you probably wouldn't have been able to read and write unless your parents taught you. So you owe the government something for the money the government spent on you.
Government spending should be a bit like index fund investment. Invest in lots of people and things and hope that some items grow more than others. Government should invest more in successful students at school. Doing well should unlock more investment in you because you're a winner.
I received a scholarship, bursary and grant when I applied for university because of my grades and writing quality when I applied to my department.
If I give someone and idea they wouldn't have originally had then I deserve some profit from the ultimate result.
The same way that Jeff Bezos parents are probably the true cause of Amazon's success because they gave him $245,000 to start up.
The VC model in society is truly messed up. The relationship between a investor and founder is adverserial and the investors try to remove the founder ASAP by diluting the shares and equity of the founder. They try get as much equity as possible for the least investment. They're greedy and over state their importance in what makes a successful company.
This post covers how bad it can be
https://auren.substack.com/p/lets-talk-about-founder-compensation
Taip!
Tikiu, kad pamirštame, kad žmogus yra toks skirtingas ir unikalus, kaip ir visi kiti!
Mes dalijamės ta pačia „struktūra“, bet skirtingais laidais.
Manau, kad dabar tai yra didžiausias išbandymas, kad toks finansinis saugumas taptų realybe.
Tiesą sakant, mano įsitikinimų sistemoje turime 5–7 metus sukurti pamatą, kuris palaikytų mūsų ateities kartas ir gerbtų mūsų protėvius... Ne ilgai.
Mano įsivaizduojamoje sistemoje: Suprantu šiuos laidus: (įkvėptas ir išmoktas iš žmogaus projektavimo sistemos) 1- genties laidai 2- individualūs laidai 3- kolektyviniai laidai
Taip pat tikiu, kad yra nustatytas bendruomenės narių limitas, kol ji pasiskirsto į dvi dalis, o tai gali sukelti konfliktą, jei tai suprantama.
Nes mes čia tam, kad mutuotume, susimaišytume ir sukurtume visas galimybes? (galbūt)
Taigi gentims joms reikia maisto, santuokos, laisvės likti ramybėje. Jie niekada neturėtų valdyti sistemos vieni, nes yra genties atstovai ir visada pirmenybę teiks savo sūnui/dukrai nei kitiems. Kurią žmonės interpretuoja kaip korupciją, ir tai tikrai veda prie to su blogu supratimu ir pasipriešinimu.
Tada žmonės ateina su visomis naujomis idėjomis, jiems patinka gyventi vieni, jiems reikia erdvės ir pan.. jų laisvė yra visų laisvė.
O kolektyvai, kurie tinka užtikrinti, kad visi būtų laimingi, kartais pavagia individo idėjas ir daug ginčijosi su gentimis, bet kaip temą iškelia kiekvieno naudą.
Kodėl susijęs? Kadangi pinigai yra valiuta arba energija × keičiamasi , ir kad mes visi galėtume keistis sveikai, turime gerbti savo dizainą .. rūpintis bendruomenėmis, visada priimti mutacijas ir turėti procedūras bei procesus .. kurie yra ekologiški... Gamta mums suteikia visi įkalčiai.
Atsiprašau, kad daug kalbu, negalėjau užmigti..
Taigi aš galvoju apie pasaulinę kooperaciją. Reikia nubraižyti eskizą ir, tikiuosi, anksčiau nei vėliau pasidalinsiu.
Yeah!
I believe we forget that a human is so so different and unique like everyone else!
We share the same "structure" but different wiring.
I think it's the ultimate test now make such a financial security a reality.
In fact in my belief system we have 5-7 years to build a foundation that will support our future generations and respect our ancestors... Not a long time.
In my imagined system: I understand the following wirings: (inspired and learned about from human design system) 1- tribal wiring 2- individual wiring 3- collective wiring
Also I believe also that there is a set limit of community members before it splits into two which arises conflict if understood.
Because we are here to mutate and blend , and produce all the possibilities? (Perhaps)
So for tribes, they need the food, the marriage, the freedom to be left alone. They should never be in control of the system alone because they are tribal and will always prefer their son/daughter than others. Which people interpret as corruption, and for sure it leads to that with bad understanding and resistance.
Then individuals they come with all the new ideas, they like to live alone, they need space etc .. their freedom is the freedom of all.
And collective which are fit for making sure all is happy, they sometimes steal the ideas of the individual and quarrel a lot with the tribes, but they put the benefit of everyone as a theme.
Why is related? Because money is a currency or an energy×exchanged , and for us all to exchange healthily we must respect our designs .. take care of communities, always accept mutations, and have procedures and processes .. that are organic... Nature gives us all the clues.
Sorry to talk a lot I couldn't sleep..
So I'm thinking of a global coop. Need to sketch it, and I will share hopefully sooner than later.