User

In an economy, goods and services are a finite thing. There is only so much produced and a limited amount of people to provide services, which means services are limited. In a free market economy, value is what drives an individual's wants and needs. Value is subjective. The reason why everyone doesn't have a Lamborgini (or any other luxury sports car) is because they can't afford one. People make choices every day of their life regarding the priority of what they value more. Example: Someone might love to golf, bowl, and collect coins. However, they can't afford to do them all. They can only afford to do one activity, because they have to work most of the time. So, they choose to value golf. However, they want to do more, so they need to make more money, so they look for a better job, get more skills, and now they have enough time to Golf and Bowl, but they still had to choose to cut back on a few other expenses during the month, like they dropped their Cable TV and Netflix subscriptions. All these decisions are made based on how much $$$$ someone has and makes... and is tracked in a budget, they have an account. A gift economy answers none of these questions. There is no gift account, there is no ability for people to save or make decisions based on their wants and needs that is reflective of what they produce. You have it completely backwards, people earn $$$$ and make decisions on how much they have. People who earn more $$$ can exchange it for more things. In a gift economy, nothing you have said explains why someone can't simply take as much as they want, because they no longer have to prioritize needs. Bill Gates can buy a yacht because he can afford it... in a gift economy, what tells someone they can't afford something?

Why is it everyone doesn't drive a Lamborgini today? -They do not produce enough value through their current work to afford one. So why would a gift economy be different? Who is this "we" that is going to be making Hundreds of millions of Lamborginis so everyone can have one? If someone did not save anything for retirement, they have nothing to gift in retirement. Do they just take whatever they want? What limits them from taking more in retirement than they ever gifted when working? How do you account for any of that? How does a gift economy account for people today who save more so they can enjoy retirement more vs those who did not save anything at all and will barely make ends meet in retirement? You are completely not answering how people prioritize wants vs needs in a gift economy when goods and services are scarce.

I thought it was quite obvious, I will be more explicit: In 1948 those surrounding Middle Eastern countries went to war against Israel. In the 6 day of war, Egypt engaged in actions tantamount to war by closing shipping lanes, and when Israel responded as they said they would, surrounding Middle Eastern countries engaged in a war against them... Not sure why you put "wars" in quotes. It demonstrates exactly what I said earlier: "Every country surrounding Israel has waged war on Isreal since its inception." What you posted further did not show that what I posted was incorrect, you just listed information prior to what I did. That does not change the fact that later, in 1947, the UN did develop a partition plan for 2 states. Israel accepted, Palestinians rejected it. When British left, Palestinians could have done similar to Israel, declared themselves a state and taken what they had... but instead they went to war against Isreal. The destruction of Israel has always been a higher priority to them than their own statehood.

Its so much easier... yet you can't answer any questions about how it works when asked. Let's try this one again... what happens when everyone wants a Lamborgini? How do people save for retirement? How do people prioritize their wants and needs? Lots of people want to go on a fancy cruise ship, but most can't afford to do so, so they must sacrifice, save, or do something different... how does a gift economy account for that? How does a gift economy deal the most basic fundamentals of scarcity of goods and services? You can't or won't answer any of these questions. Telling me to shut up? How is a gift economy supposed to work when people like you exist and can't even gift a nice discussion? Why would you be trusted to gift enough to compensate for what you are taking from everyone else?

No, you completely ignored my questions and the point regarding how the free market economy works. Further, the fact that you have to resort to calling me names like faker, shows that you can't even muster up enough grace to offer me a better gift of exchange here and want us to believe an entire economy based on gifts would work and be better.

No, you ignored almost this entire post here: https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/48807-the-way-to-heaven-abolish-money/?do=findComment&comment=1700275

Not when it is you who made the baseless assertion about the gift economy, balked at challenging questions, ignored my previous points, just to make another baseless assertion again. Which is why I say: clearly not.

Clearly not.

OK. You are not actually defending your assertions here from critical review though. its sounds nice, but clearly you have not given much thought to how it actually functions as you are not prepared for these kinds of challenging questions.

UN partition plan would have given Palestinians their own land, they rejected it. British left in 1948, Israel declared themselves a state... Arabs/Palestinians go to war against them instead of keeping their own. 1948 War - Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Palestinians, Egypt 6 Day war - Egypt, Syria, Jordan with more contributing On and on and on...

Who is this "we" and who is running all these trains and trucks? Let me cut right to the chase since my rhetorical questions are not getting through. The complexity behind how things work in a free market is beyond control and works best when free people are free to engage in trade of their goods and services, something a gift economy does not achieve. I suggest you watch a video called I, Pencil. To my point about asparagus... why would people only take what they need and what happens when everyone wants asparagus even if it is only what they need? Asparagus costs more, because it is harder to produce and the cost reflects that. Lets make this a little more apparent. In your gift economy, what happens when everyone wants a Lamborghini?

More accurate: "Every country surrounding Israel has waged war on Isreal since its inception." I will also point out that at the inception of Israel, Palestinians also had their own state... and they chose war instead.

No, that is not obvious at all. As I already explained to you and you completely ignored (A disturbing theme with you) is that IF whatever Trump said was true, it was insulting... the way "losers" was used here was merely a description of fact, that if you die, they have lost their lives. It was not insulting... his comment was clearly in defense of them not losing their lives, not mocking them for it. Why do have to purposefully distort what others are saying like this?

How does any of the truck drivers know the community wants carrots? are they full time carrot drivers? How do they know to move their family and life and get a home near the carrots and what stores to deliver to? What if everyone wants asparagus instead? it’s a gift economy, so what prevents people from wanting and taking something more than they might otherwise? Asparagus is usually harder to grow, so why is someone going to grow asparagus? Why stops someone from coming into the store and taking it all?

Why is a truck driver going out to a carrot farm? Why are any of them?

It’s a Carrort farm man. All the person does is grow carrots. How does he get them all to all the stores by himself when his time is spent farming them?

If you grow carrots for a living and someone doesn't need carrots... what are you gifting them? Do you just carry around a truckload of carrots everywhere you go to gift people? How is that practical? What happens when you have too many carrots and can't practically gift them all, do they just rot?

Well... it doesn't matter who you are if you are outright violating the 1st Amendment. Anyone can do that or want to do that or abuse their power to do that.

It is as ILLEGAL after the fact as was Al Gore's attempt to seize power and illegally disenfranchise millions of voters. Let me know when you want to quote something specific from the article you want me to review that you agree with.

Now you are making stuff up. There is ZERO evidence that Trump was part of any plan to engage in violence. Trump did not go to court over any of his plans because he never executed them. He walked out of office peacefully. Trump did not send a mob, Trump engaged in a peaceful protest and left.

What are you gifting if you abolish money?

And what is meant by saying we are a Christian nation? That can mean many things and is a very common saying among folks in regard to our country being predominately Christian. Thinking such and saying such and wanting such is not a violation of the 1st Amendment at all.

No. It wasn't. And the facts... what facts? Have you seen the documents the Department of Education has that outlines their methodology and reasoning for the fine? Last I checked, they were not releasing those and folks were fighting to get them with FOIA. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona testified to Congress on the record last week that he was going to shut them down. The facts seem to show this is a very vindictive targeting of them, and likely out of retaliation. They fined them 37 Million because they claimed they were not disclosing the continuation credtis often needed to complete a Doctoral program, when GCU did in fact provide a calculator which showed this to student on one of the website pages to help them calculate costs. Here you go, if you want to read some more on this: https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2024/04/19/cardonas-vow-to-shut-down-gcu-called-disturbing-and-inflammatory/

No, his actions do not check every box of what a coup is, no more than Al Gores did. Not lying about anything. Now you claim what he did was not illegal? Um, try again: "Despite violating the Fourteenth Amendment by using disparate vote-counting procedures in different counties, Florida did not need to complete a recount in the 2000 presidential election because it could not be accomplished in a constitutionally valid way within the time limit set by federal law for resolving these controversies." https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/98/ ILLEGAL. AL GORE TRIED TO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION AND "SIEZE" POWER! If it is so obviously a coup, if it checks all the boxes, why would there be any risk of conviction? If there is some rogue Trump juror, that doesn't change regardless of the charges.

What are you talking about?