I told you, my blog. Or yours or anywhere that is actually likely to be seen. BTW my blog is working fine, you lying cunt.
Practically everything you say is a lie. By the way, I'll keep swearing at you until you stop lying and wasting my time. That is far more rude than calling you a waste of sperm that would best help society by getting cancer and taking part in a drug trial.
"I think i've explained how an RBE would determine values of materials.:
Well then you're an idiot aren't you? What you've said is that you will collect a bunch of data and somehow put it all together to determine opportunity costs and value.
" It would be calculated out of two parameters: the available amount of the material, and the need for that material in society."
The first is a meaningless measure, what does it mean "the available amount of material"? Do you mean all of the material that could possibly be extracted no matter what the cost in other materials? Because that would be fucking stupid. No you'd have to consider how much materials would be extractable given certain resource limitations which wouldn't be able to ennumerate because you don't have a measure of value. To have a measure of value of the resources used to extract the material you'd have to have a measure of value of the material itself, which you can't have until you measure the value of the resources used to extract it.
The second measure is also meaningless, all it tells you is that a certain product has positive value not how much value it has.
" And if you can show me a flaw in our system, i'll be happy, because we try to learn from criticisms, not ignore them or get mad about them"
No you fucking won't because I already showed you a flaw in your system you ignorant cunt.
"-you said we have no mechanisms to determine value, right?":
Yes and I was right. The shit you brought up is not a fucking mechanism. It's the fucking specifications for what the mechanism has to do, with NO way to do it.
" I'll visit it if you stop with the namecalling, i believe i can at least expect that tiny bit of common courtesy"
No you fucking can't expect that tiny bit of common courtesy, fucktard. What you can expect is for me to be pissed off that you wasted my time after I specifically told you that your shit was shit. Now either get some real information or FUCK OFF.
" But until then, you're welcome to copy this exchange over there, if you're not too ashamed of your rude behaviour."
Thanks but I don't need your permission. I'm not ashamed of my behaviour, although you should be ashamed of yours. You wasted my time with lies fucktard.
"OK what public place would be good enough for you to have a conversation with me? You keep saying that i'm lying to you. I'd be happy to have people around us to verify i'm not lying, i'm just trying to explain what i know about TVP.
I think i've explained how an RBE would determine values of materials. It would be calculated out of two parameters: the available amount of the material, and the need for that material in society. We have no money, so there would be no monetary value associated with it. That is just a short answer, but ask a more detailed question and i'll answer that too, as good as i know! And if you can show me a flaw in our system, i'll be happy, because we try to learn from criticisms, not ignore them or get mad about them.
"That someone will collect data and smart people will use it decide what to do."
-a slight bit different. Most of that data collecting will be automated, and deciding what to do won't be arbitrary, it will also follow from what data we collect from society, what people need, want, what is needed to improve life. So in a late phase of a resource based economy, most of this will be automated, no human bias or corruption involved.
"There is NOTHING, NOTHING I said about TVP that isn't true."
-you said we have no mechanisms to determine value, right? I'm just saying that we do have it worked out, so if you're attacking a system that doesn't know how to find out values and costs, you're not criticising TVP.
Ooooh, you've got a blog? I'll visit it if you stop with the namecalling, i believe i can at least expect that tiny bit of common courtesy. But until then, you're welcome to copy this exchange over there, if you're not too ashamed of your rude behaviour.
PS: i tried to reach your blog page but it didn't work."
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Hello!
I'm here, so as much as you wanted to just avoid me, you'll have to muster up some courage now. Ask your big question, the one you think buries RBE, that is if you're still up to talking.
Hello!
As much as you tried to avoid me with your empty rudeness and just general cowardice, i'm here now. Ask away, let's see this big question that you think will bury RBE's. If you can muster up the courage.
I still see no comments posted here, am i the only one who comments on this blog, or am i just doing something wrong with this blogger thing :P
blogger247n I already asked the question that buries RBE, "How will opportunities costs and values be measured in RBE?". There is no answer to this and you know it. If there was an answer you wouldn't have given me the meaningless vague shit you did.
OK thanks for turning off moderation.
Firstly, we obviously can't measure opportunities costs and values by monetary value, it's a resource based economy so that doesn't work that way.
Second, i'm not an economy professor, but from what i figure you wish to know, it would be handled in two ways mostly. Democratically and scientifically.
This is about measuring the cost against the value of the best alternative, right? On a micro level, it all stays the same, people simply decide on their own, there is no force involved to push them in a direction. On a medium scale, like city scale, decisions are made based on what's most needed or wanted by the population. So if we decide to expand the electric grid, we'll monitor how that will influence other projects, what setbacks there would be in other areas. Of course the interest and wellbeing of most of the population would be top priority, so that's how we would arrive at our decisions. So purely scientifically. Or, in case of wanted things, it would happen democratically, like if the people of a city want a new tennis court or a new swimming pool built next, and which one should be the priority.
On a global scale, and everything works on a global scale in an RBE, it would work similarily. Either we scientifically decide what's best for most of the population and compare it against the benefits of the second best (the opportunity cost, right?), or we decide democratically, if there's no other way or the question is "too big", and has to involve people's opinions.
I think that would make for a fair system that makes sure people are living a quality life. Now if that's not exactly what you wanted to know, be more specific... as i said, this isn't my field, but it doesn't have to be for me to be able to explain things.
You could also explain a scenario you believe a resource based economy couldn't handle, i'm curious.
OK, that's it for now.
"Firstly, we obviously can't measure opportunities costs and values by monetary value, it's a resource based economy so that doesn't work that way."
I know that dumbshit, that's why it's an issue.
"On a micro level, it all stays the same, people simply decide on their own, there is no force involved to push them in a direction.:
No it doesn't stay the same, you've just said it doesn't you loathsome little cunt. If there is no money there is nothing to tell people they're consuming too much resources.
". On a medium scale, like city scale, decisions are made based on what's most needed or wanted by the population."
And how the hell is that measured, moron? A vote can't measure how much you want something so democracy won't work in this context.
"Of course the interest and wellbeing of most of the population would be top priority, so that's how we would arrive at our decisions. So purely scientifically."
But fucktard you have no way of knowing the interest or wellbeing of most of the population because you can't discover their individual priorites. This isn't scientific, all you're doing is pulling shit out of your ass. Science requires MEASUREMENT you useless waste of protein.
"Either we scientifically decide what's best for most of the population "
Look, shithead you STILL haven't described a measurement system so fuck off talking about being scientific. It's not scientific and deep down you know it.
"I know that dumbshit, that's why it's an issue. "
Prove it to me that it's an issue, i say it isn't.
"No it doesn't stay the same, you've just said it doesn't you loathsome little cunt. If there is no money there is nothing to tell people they're consuming too much resources."
Exactly, there is no forcing people into consuming less than they want in our system ;)
Of course, common sense, education, an innate wish to not be destructive, to contribute to everyone's wellbeing, will ensure balance.
"And how the hell is that measured, moron? A vote can't measure how much you want something so democracy won't work in this context."
Why the hell wouldn't voting work?
But fucktard you have no way of knowing the interest or wellbeing of most of the population because you can't discover their individual priorites."
It can be, but it would be tedious, and almost irrelevant for medium scale planning so group priorities are what we are interested in here. As i explained, on a medium scale projects are proposed, and then groups of people support one project or the other, or the third, etc... or they propose their own ideas and those ideas, if popular, gain support.
"This isn't scientific, all you're doing is pulling shit out of your ass. Science requires MEASUREMENT you useless waste of protein."
Exactly, and since it looks like you haven't heard of it yet, look up the word "survey" :) It is a process of MEASURING information in a population, and it is being done today, so i honestly don't understand why you don't think it would be possible in an RBE.
"Look, shithead you STILL haven't described a measurement system so fuck off talking about being scientific. It's not scientific and deep down you know it."
SURVEY... :) look up sociological surveys, please :P
"Look, shithead you STILL haven't described a measurement system so fuck off talking about being scientific. It's not scientific and deep down you know it."
Oh and i almost forgot. Surveys would be used only to determine DEMOCRATICALLY... there are more natural scientific methods to find out what the global population needs. How much of our energy needs are covered? How about food, is there enough of each nutrient available for every human's diet? Do we have a great number of certain diseases in the population, and what can be done to reduce those? Diabetes? We inform people more often about this. Cancer? We try to determine exactly which type and what are the possible causes and reduce/remove them.
It's all a big system, EXACTLY like the ones we have today, just global, interested primarily in people's wellbeing, not run by people as much as today's systems, and not dependent on money.
ME: "I know that dumbshit, that's why it's an issue. "
Idiot: "Prove it to me that it's an issue, i say it isn't."
If opportunity costs aren't an issue it's because your system assumes infinite resources, which means it's mental masturbation. Fuck off and masturbate by yourself.
ME: "No it doesn't stay the same, you've just said it doesn't you loathsome little cunt. If there is no money there is nothing to tell people they're consuming too much resources."
Idiot: "Exactly, there is no forcing people into consuming less than they want in our system ;)"
So then you don't tell them what they're doing is consuming too much resources and you run out of resources. You lose.
Idiot: "Of course, common sense, education, an innate wish to not be destructive, to contribute to everyone's wellbeing, will ensure balance."
No dumbshit, none of that will work because you don't have a system to assign values to resources. Common sense won't tell you that what you're consuming is worth less than what could be made out of it. Nor will education without a means of measuring value which you don't have.
ME: "And how the hell is that measured, moron? A vote can't measure how much you want something so democracy won't work in this context."
Idiot: "Why the hell wouldn't voting work?"
Learn to read dumbshit. A vote can't measure how much you want something. A vote simply says you want it, not that you want it enough to sacrifice something else.
ME: "But fucktard you have no way of knowing the interest or wellbeing of most of the population because you can't discover their individual priorites."
Idiot: "It can be, but it would be tedious, and almost irrelevant for medium scale planning so group priorities are what we are interested in here. "
No retard, we're interested in what's actually going to be produced, which includes things for INDIVIDUAL use.
Idiot: "As i explained, on a medium scale projects are proposed, and then groups of people support one project or the other, or the third, etc... or they propose their own ideas and those ideas, if popular, gain support."
Great and how are they told what they have to do without to get what they want? If they want, say a new bridge between the town of Ketchikan, Alaska and Gravina Island how are you going to tell them what they can't have if they build it? There is no mechanism for doing this in TVP. In fact TVP can be seen as being specifically designed to avoid the question.
A survey doesn't establish priorities, it establishes what people would do if it could be done without compromising any other goal. This information is worthless.
ME: "This isn't scientific, all you're doing is pulling shit out of your ass. Science requires MEASUREMENT you useless waste of protein."
Idiot: "Exactly, and since it looks like you haven't heard of it yet, look up the word "survey" :) It is a process of MEASURING information in a population, and it is being done today, so i honestly don't understand why you don't think it would be possible in an RBE."
No dipshit, asking people whether they want something doesn't measure value. All it measures is whether value is positive.
Idiot: "SURVEY... :) look up sociological surveys, please :P"
Does not measure value. Now shithead, stop wasting my time. You know less economics than most people who live in stone age societies. You don't understand simple concepts that I explain in the simplest language I can think of. Go away. You're wrong but you're too stupid to understand that you're wrong.
"Oh and i almost forgot. Surveys would be used only to determine DEMOCRATICALLY... there are more natural scientific methods to find out what the global population needs."
No there isn't. Unless you mean literally needs like "This person will die if they don't get this.". But unless you're going to have everyone live just over starvation you're going to have to determine a lot more than that.
"How much of our energy needs are covered?"
That's a meaningless question, how much energy do I "need"? I don't "need" to fly to the moon, I don't "need" to write this post.
"How about food, is there enough of each nutrient available for every human's diet?"
And is that all you're going to determine? Nobody gets to eat what they actually want? You see dumbshit, this is what happens when you assume you can just determine what people should be given without a price system. You look like a dumbshit.
"Do we have a great number of certain diseases in the population, and what can be done to reduce those? Diabetes? We inform people more often about this. Cancer? We try to determine exactly which type and what are the possible causes and reduce/remove them."
And how do you determine whether to put resources into fighting cancer or diabeties? Or rheumatoid arthritis?
"It's all a big system, EXACTLY like the ones we have today,"
No dumbshit it's not exactly like the one we have today it doesn't have a price mechanism. Fuck are you just fucking with me at this point? Surely you're not so stupid you forgot how your own system works?
"just global, interested primarily in people's wellbeing, not run by people as much as today's systems, and not dependent on money."
It's still going to be run by people, they'll just hide behind the programs they create. If your system was interested in human wellbeing it would have a price mechanism of some sort.
Hey!
Sorry, haven't had a lot of time lately. But back to the conversation.
"If opportunity costs aren't an issue it's because your system assumes infinite resources, which means it's mental masturbation. Fuck off and masturbate by yourself."
You've dodged my question, why is it important to measure oppurtunity costs with a monetary cost? I've shown you examples of how we'd "measure" those costs in an RBE, so you still have to prove why we absolutely need money. And stop building strawmen. We don't assume infinite resources, we say that resources on the planet are finite in pretty much the first sentence when we describe a resource based economy to people.
"So then you don't tell them what they're doing is consuming too much resources and you run out of resources. You lose."
Learn how to read, i said "there is no forcing people...", not that there's nothing at all suggesting people not to overconsume. And another thing, people don't normally overconsume. Only when they feel the pressures of society and are conditioned to overconsume, when being ABLE to overconsume is a status symbol. All that is gone in a RBE.
"No dumbshit, none of that will work because you don't have a system to assign values to resources."
What?? You... you mean there will be no common sense, education, no wish to contribute, no interest in wellbeing, just because there is no monetary value attached to things? Wow. You just... no, nonono. Prove some of what you say, seriously. You make outrageous claims like this, you back your words up.
"Common sense won't tell you that what you're consuming is worth less than what could be made out of it. Nor will education without a means of measuring value which you don't have."
I've explained to you that we have a means to measure VALUE, just not a MONETARY value... Just return to the first question and show me why exactly you believe money is so important.
"Learn to read dumbshit. A vote can't measure how much you want something. A vote simply says you want it, not that you want it enough to sacrifice something else."
Aaahh... an example then. You survey a group of people and ask them how much, on a scale of 1 to 10, they want something. Done. I think i was clear about this when i said there would be surveys.
"Great and how are they told what they have to do without to get what they want? If they want, say a new bridge between the town of Ketchikan, Alaska and Gravina Island how are you going to tell them what they can't have if they build it? There is no mechanism for doing this in TVP. In fact TVP can be seen as being specifically designed to avoid the question."
"A survey doesn't establish priorities, it establishes what people would do if it could be done without compromising any other goal. This information is worthless."
OK so if people want a new bridge to be built next, they will have to understand that the construction operators will be busy for a time, and that other projects will have to come after the one they think is a priority. Another example, people want another sports object in their city, but there is only this much space. They will understand this, building one object will cost them the other (which can however still be built but at a different site).
The costs of such things in an RBE are measured just as the name suggests... in resources. And in time, obviously. The people can be given no more than there is to give, and no faster than those things can be produced.
(continued)
"No dipshit, asking people whether they want something doesn't measure value. All it measures is whether value is positive."
You must really think before you write. But as i already said, you CAN measure value with surveys... when is the last time you've had a company survey how satisfied you were with their services? Well, they had specific questions, like "how satisfied are you with our delivery time?" and you had many options to answer, like "not pleased at all" all the way up to "very pleased". Life isn't in black and white... and so aren't economies, and so isn't the RBE... too many people think there's just capitalism and communism, and that's it. Things aren't that simple... and that's why i understand why RBE's are difficult to grasp. But we'll get there.
"No there isn't. Unless you mean literally needs like "This person will die if they don't get this.". But unless you're going to have everyone live just over starvation you're going to have to determine a lot more than that."
This is exactly what i mean! But knowing what are the minimum necessities for life doesn't mean we would have people live on the minimum - that's just what you assume, because you really really love to build strawmen and because you really really can't grasp that we're not commies :) I think i told you - the aim of the RBE is to make all people live healthy lives... so finding out what the recommended intake of calories, certain amino acids, vitamins, minerals, etc... it's simply the scientific method applied in real life economics.
"And is that all you're going to determine? Nobody gets to eat what they actually want? You see dumbshit, this is what happens when you assume you can just determine what people should be given without a price system. You look like a dumbshit."
And again, this is what happens when you assume we'll have people living on rice. When did i ever say we'll prevent people from getting what they want? You were complaining earlier IN THIS POST that we assume infinite resources because of this exact reason, not forcibly preventing people from getting what they want. Try to be coherent when you attempt to make counterarguments.
"And how do you determine whether to put resources into fighting cancer or diabeties? Or rheumatoid arthritis?"
I believe i can pretty much copypaste what i wrote in the first place: Do we have a great number of certain diseases in the population, and what can be done to reduce those?
So we again SURVEY the population, see how many people there are afflicted with certain diseases. How many new cases are there in a time period. How debilitating is the disease. How could it be treated? Professionals assess all those factors, and focus on the greatest problems as the greatest priority.
"...If your system was interested in human wellbeing it would have a price mechanism of some sort."
Returning to the main question. WHY is it so important to have a monetary value assigned to everything? Value can be measured in different ways. Sure, we would use what the monetary system taught us! Capitalism, all that - it was very important in human development! We won't just throw out all the numbers and speculate on what's more common: dirt or diamonds. But we will abandon those numbers and currencies we're used to today.
Alright, that would be all for now. I hope you'll read this with an open mind, and not just try to disagree with me. Disagreement makes sense if there is a genuine wish for understanding behind it. Later!
Post a Comment