RE: Why Technocrats LOVE The "Green New Deal"
Nah...sorry for not stating clearly what I am about. I am for anarchy moderated only by the principles of Common Law. I am all for making available for free a decentralized trading platform for real goods and services, where anyone can trade in terms of tokens that exist on that platform only, without having to beg, borrow or steal money to get started. There are already more than a thousand such markets running in many countries. Those markets prove that trading of real goods and services can be done perfectly well without banks or ordinary(fiat) money having to play any roll; I wish to expand that idea to make it possible for people like the elderly and disabled who cannot be productive to be given their fair share too.
And you should be rewarded, not taxed, for making the land productive!
I believe central banks and fiat currency are by their nature poison to the economy. Instead of money being fed into the economy from the top, purchasing power should in my opinion rather be fed into the economy from the very grassroots. Please read some of my posts if you want to have more clarity about this. It is grossly unfair that the resources we all depend on are owned by a privileged minority. Would it not be more fair if each of us owned our fair share of those resources.
I hope to spell out more clearly what I am trying to get across in future posts.
clicketyclick -
Pragmatism is aversion to principle. No valid philosophy can't be practiced to the nth degree. I own myself and nobody else. Like old Patrick Henry said, I gotta be free or dead. It is irrational to seek the conversion of others, and I am not an altruist so I don't pursue it.
I think you are getting across very well what you are pursuing. I'm going the other way thanks. Civilization is not sustainable and neither can it ever be. I am not a civilized man.
Enjoy your day.
Woodchuck Pirate
aka Raymond J Raupers Jr USA
woodchuckpirate.com
Hi @woodchuck-pirate,
There ain't nothin' like perfection. We can make things better, but it is unlikely that we will ever perfect anything. I don't see anything wrong with making the best of life though. And where I see possible ways and means to that end, I would be foolish not to pursue these.
I am for life being the best possible experience.
So securing factors that contribute to quality of life makes sense.
Neutralizing and destroying factors that detract from quality of life also make sense.
Building things that contribute to quality of life makes sense too.
Making available virtually for free a market in which it is easier and cheaper to trade whatever you have to trade (if you want too - no obligation) without any authorities blowing in your neck, or taxing you, kinda makes sense to me. If something like this makes life easier for people around me, life is likely to be better for me as well, with less people having to beg, borrow, of steal from me and more people producing things that may come in handy for me.
If any other way holds a better future for you, feel free and pursue it.
Conflict destroys; synergy builds. Simple principles. Making the wrong choice creates enemies and may be the wrong investment to make, as it is likely to destroy the quality of your life experience eventually, in spite of short term gains you may obtain. I have found keeping this in mind to be profitable.
Good luck!
C