ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

A real Starfleet Academy?

Devinoni

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 57

Report this Apr. 02 2013, 11:56 am

humanityresurrected: Once again I thank you for your input.


As to "the plan", it is still very much on the drawing-board.


 


So far I have (thanks to the input and discussion held here) so far established that:


- This will be a PRE-Academy organization, and as such will not bear the title of Academy.


Instead it will be refered to as Starfleet Alpha.


 


I will keep you posted as things move forward.


 


 


Make it so.

humanityresurrected

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 196

Report this Apr. 03 2013, 5:36 am

Ok!


But shirley Star Trek geeks can add more than has been said here!

miklamar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2164

Report this Apr. 03 2013, 7:12 am

The Starfleet Academy is a wonderful idea, but where would its graduates go?  Would they be able to obtain funding to build spaceships?  How many spacestations or starbases are seeking employees in 2013?  Are there any internships on Alpha Centauri III?


Until you could incorporate what you learn at the academy, in an actual career, it will remain a pipe dream.


Var Miklama--Zakdorn, engineer. "A sound mind in a FULL body!" "Time, like latinum, is a limited quantity in the galaxy."

humanityresurrected

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 196

Report this Apr. 03 2013, 7:19 am

one thing for sure is we have to start thinkg differently. Stop thinking like those of this world think! when they were trying to come up with 8 hours of work 8 hours of leisure 8 hours of sleep, and get children out of factories they were called communist. why has not our society updated to todays tech?


 The bible offers three metaphors 1. life is a test 2. life is a trust and 3. life is a temporary assignment.  That it's integrity that keeps the triangle statnding. 1. i s this true? 2. Is what i say consistent with what i do? and 3. Is this what i beleive i should do? In my circle of influence we could be more pateint 2. more wise and 3. more loving. I know that it will take 1. hard work 2. risk and 3 prayer.Now that i'm saved and understand Romans 10:9, iwould like some help before i get baptized. I need to find a church that can help me plan for to tomorrow, to make today a plan to help others. my mision is to live with integrity and make a difference in the lives of others. To fullfill this mission i must have charity. i seek out and love each other regardless of the person's situation. i sacrifice! I devote my time, my talents, and my resources to my mission. i inspire! I teach by example, that we are all children of a loving, heavenly father, and that every Goliath can be overcome. I am impactful! What i do makes a difference in the lives of others. My wife is the most imporatnperson in my life, and these roles take priorty in achieving my mission. Together my wife and i contribute the fruits of harmony, industry, charity, and thrift. God can count on me to keep my covenants, and to serve God's other children. The love of Christ is visible through my actions toward my neightbors. That we should open our eyes to the wonderful things. open my eyes to the cetainty that oppotunity and greatness are waiting for me right now. Open my eyes to the gaurntee that God will place that oppotunity in my path. The decision to take it there amd come alive... is mine. I have moved closer to neighbors, yet I am still so far away from my neighbors. Will you help me?So much more to say, but there is a time and place for everything. 

 
How to think like a world class christian1. Shift from self-centered thinking to other-centered thinking. The bible states, "my friends stop thinking like children. Think like mature people. Corinthians 14:20 The only way we can make this paradigm switch is moment by moment dependence on God. Fortunately God doesnt leave us to struggle alone. "God has given us Gods spirit. thats why we dont think the same way that the people of this world think 1 Corinthians 2:12


 


2. Shift from local thinking to global thinking. The bible states;" if you ask me, I will give you the nations, all the people of the earth will be yours. Psalm 2:8


 


3. Shift from thinking of excuses to thinking of creative ways to fulfill our commission. "Sarah claiming she was too old, or Jeremiah claiming he was too young. " Dont say that, the lord replied, for you must go wherever i send you and say whatever i tell you. And dont be afraid of the people, for i will be with you and take care of you. Jeremiah 1:7-8


 


4. Shift from here and now thinking to eternal thinking. To make the most of our life/time on earth. we must maintain an external perspective. "we fix our eyes on what is seen, but what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal 2 Corinthians 4:18


 


"You can tell what they are by what they do" matthew 7:16What You are shouts so loudly in my ears, i cannot hear what you say. So what we are communicates far more eloquently that anything we say or do. We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. Habits can be learned and un-learned, but i also know its not a quick fix. It involves a process and a tremendous commitment. Into every individual is a marvelous power of good and evil- the silent unconscious, unseen influence of their life. This is simply the constant radiation of what man really is, not what we pretend to be. 


 


"It is impossible for us to break the law. We can only break ourselves from the law." Breaking deeply embedded habitual tendencies such as procrastination, impatience, criticalness, or selfishness. that violate the basic principles of human effectiveness involves more than a little willpower and a few minor changes in our lives. We could spend weeks, months, even years laboring with the personal ethic, trying to change our attitudes (altitude) and behaviors and not even begin to approach the phenomenon of change that occurs spontaneously when we see things differently. "for every thousand hacking at the leaves of evil, there is one striking at the root."

 I urge us to make a group covenant that includes nine characteristics of biblical fellowship.1. authenticity-we will share our true feelings. 2. sympathy- support each other3. mutuality- encourage each other4. mercy-forgive each other5. honesty- speak the truth in love6. humility-admit our weakness7. courtesy- respect our differences8. confidentiality-not gossip9. frequency-make a group a priority 


 


when you look at the characteristics, its obvious why genuine fellowship is rare. It means give up our self-centeredness and independence in order to become interdependent. Life is by nature, highly interdependent, i am self reliant and capable, but i also know you and i working together can accomplish farm more then even at my best, i could accomplish alone. We find people, often for selfish reasons, leaving their marriages, abandoning their children, and forsaking all kinds of social responsibility-all in the name of INDEPENDENCE. The benefits of sharing life together, far outweigh the cost, and it prepares us for the life of eternity in heaven.


 


Point to ponder: Community requires commitment 


 


Verse to remember: We understand what love is when we realize that Christ gave his life for us. That means we must give our lives for each other John 3"16


 


Question to consider: How can i help cultivate today the characteristics of a real community in my small group and my church?


It takes both God's power and our effort to produce a loving Christian community.  you are joined together with peace through the spirit, so we make ever effort to continue together in this way. EPH 4:13 you can develop a healthy, robust community that lives right with God and enjoy its results only if you do the hard work of getting along with each other, traeting each other with dignity and honor, James 3"18 They committed themselves to the teaching of the apostles, the life together, the common meal, and the prayer.Acts 2:42 Speak the truth in love. EPH 4:15 Clothe yourself with humility toward one another Peter 5:5 ive in harmony with each other. Dont try to act important, but enjoy the company of ordinary people. and dont think you know it all. Romans 12:16 Give more honor to others than yourself. Do not be interested only in your own life, but be interested in the lives of others. philippians 2:3-4 We must bear the "burden" of being considerate of the doubts and fears of others. Romans 15:12 God's people should be big hearted and courteous. Titus 3:2 Be devoted to each other like a loving family. excel in showing respect for each other. Romans 12:10 Gossip is spread by wicked people; they stir up trouble and break friendships. proverbs 16:28 Let us not give up the habit of getting together, as some are doing. instead let us encourage one another. hebrews 10:25 they worship together regularly at the temple each day, met in small groups in homes for communion, and shared their meals with great joy and thankfulness. acts 2:46


Who's job is it to end poverty? Poverty refers to being unable to afford basic human needs, which commonly includes clean and fresh water, nutrition, health care, education, clothing and shelter.

Devinoni

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 57

Report this Apr. 03 2013, 11:55 am

Ok!


But shirley Star Trek geeks can add more than has been said here!




Well, that is frankly what I was hoping too. 




The Starfleet Academy is a wonderful idea, but where would its graduates go?  Would they be able to obtain funding to build spaceships?  How many spacestations or starbases are seeking employees in 2013?  Are there any internships on Alpha Centauri III?


Until you could incorporate what you learn at the academy, in an actual career, it will remain a pipe dream.


 


To me Starfleet and it's Academy is more than just a prep school for spaceship personel.


If you merely seek a ticket to a spaceship or a space mission, then it really doesn't matter if it's Starfleet, Starship Troopers, Colonial Space Marines or the equivalent of Loveboat in space.


 


If that is your only objective then that's fine, but to me Starfleet embodies much more.


 


I could start summing up what Starfleet represents in terms of ethical and moral values, but I really hope that ST fans would not need to be reminded of those.


 


So why start Starfleet Alpha today instead of simply waiting untill we have spaceships or space missions?


1) Because writting down ethical and moral values as represented by Starfleet is a huge undertaking to begin with. I can try to do it on my own to the best of my abilities or I can hope, for more like-minded people to join in this huge task.


2) If we grow in numbers, we grow in strength - if 20 people try to raise an voice, nobody will care - if 2000 do, they might start to listen - if 2 million people do,  it will be hard to be ignored.


 


I know something like a Starfleet code of conduct doesn't sound like the excitement of discovering uncharted regions of space or like meeting new inteligent speccies but....


 


We must start somewhere, the future starts today.


 


 


 


Make it so.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46342

Report this Apr. 03 2013, 3:36 pm

Quote: Devinoni @ Apr. 03 2013, 11:55 am

>

style="margin: 0px 0px 3px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 12px; vertical-align: baseline; color: #6a6a6a; clear: both; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; line-height: 16px;">2) If we grow in numbers, we grow in strength - if 20 people try to raise an voice, nobody will care - if 2000 do, they might start to listen - if 2 million people do,  it will be hard to be ignored.

>
Depends on who's all involved and and who's "in charge."

Devinoni

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 57

Report this Apr. 03 2013, 5:32 pm


Depends on who's all involved and and who's "in charge."




That is a valid concern and I am well aware the concept could turn into a recipe for disaster if it is poorly executed.


With that knowledge in mind it is imperative to first and foremost transcribe the ideals and codes of the Starfleet we know and love (the fictional one) in the best of our abilities. 


To make a Starfleet manual or constitution is what Starfleet Alpha is about.




It's a frame of reference that people can freely integrate in their lives.


At best it's philosophy, meaning that it will not be impossed on people.


It's not a way to power nor will it grants you special privileges.








Make it so.

humanityresurrected

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 196

Report this Apr. 03 2013, 6:46 pm

in charge of what? 


"You can tell what they are by what they do" matthew 7:16What You are shouts so loudly in my ears, i cannot hear what you say. So what we are communicates far more eloquently that anything we say or do. We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. Habits can be learned and un-learned, but i also know its not a quick fix. It involves a process and a tremendous commitment. Into every individual is a marvelous power of good and evil- the silent unconscious, unseen influence of their life. This is simply the constant radiation of what man really is, not what we pretend to be."




The principles you speak of are not esoteric, mysterious, religious, etc, they are self evident. 


Who's job is it to end poverty? Poverty refers to being unable to afford basic human needs, which commonly includes clean and fresh water, nutrition, health care, education, clothing and shelter.

humanityresurrected

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 196

Report this Apr. 04 2013, 7:37 am

Incentive (Drive, motivation)
 
 
Sections
 
What incentive is there in a monetary system? 
 
What incentive is there in a Resource Based Economy?
 
Interdisciplinary teams
 
What about lazy people who do not contribute?
 
What will I do in all my spare time?
 
Volunteerism
 
Innovation
 
Daniel Pink’s research
 
Sources
 
 
In a Resource Based Economy, a system where people do not have to submit to a private dictatorship on a daily basis and having access to all goods and services, medical care, education, shelter, food etc without a price tag, may seem extremely foreign to the current culture. And it is easy to see why since the current culture is based on competition, differential advantage and the money sequence of value as the primary goals. So in turn many of the same remarks spring up such as “money can be the only incentive!” or “people need to be forced to earn a living!” or “Why should I work when others don’t have to!?”
 
What incentive is there in a monetary system? 
 
 
Lets us consider what many think to be the good side of profit priority within a monetary system – “Incentive”. As the theory goes, the need for profit provides a person or organization with a motivation to work on new ideas or products that would sell on the market place. In other words, the assumption is that if technology replaced humans in the workforce and an abundance could be created then people would just have no motivation to do anything socially relevant. "No monetary incentive, no progress" is the idea. There are two glaring issues with this assumption: The first is that it's entirely based on projected values. And the values are almost entirely based on culture.
 
The second thing to consider is that while it is true that useful inventions and methods do come from motivation for personal gain, the intent behind those creations has nothing to do with human or social concern. For the incentive goal is not to improve humanity but to make money. There is a massive disconnect that the very means by which money is obtained in our system is counter to social progress fundamentally for it's based on the deliberate withholding of efficiency. 
Yes, I agree, the incentive to compete does produce some improved goods and services, to a certain degree, but that positive is utterly overshadowed by the planned obsolescence, the inherent planned obsolescence, and the general environmental indifference generated by the necessity to stay ahead of someone else.
Not only are most goods produced in our current society inherently inferior due to the need to maintain a competitive cost-basis in the market place, but the competitive system also generates massive amounts of corruption.
The traditional corruption that we see occurring on a daily basis is based and derived from this incentive for income which spreads like a malignant cancer of an indifferent self-interest from product dishonesty, murder, fraud and theft, slave labor, outsourcing, price fixing, monopolistic collusion, redundant waste, environmental exploitation, illegal taxation, institutional theft, societal indifference, imposed psychological distortions or advertising, and of course the sickest monetary incentive, ever created, war! That is the reality of the monetary incentive.
 
Profit interest almost always comes before human concern, and a simple glance at the cancer-causing preservatives in our foods, the planned obsolescence of nearly everything manufactured, along with a health care industry that charges $300 for a single antibiotic pill, will indicate that ‘Profit Based Incentive’ is actually detrimental, for the true incentive is not to contribute to society in a meaningful way, but merely to exact wealth from it in any way possible. 
 
Profit is actually a false incentive. Problems in our monetary based society will only have a resolution if profit can be made from solving those problems.
 
The most important issue for a human being is survival, and in a Monetary System this inherent self-interest translates into the constant pursuit of ‘Profit’. This mentality has proven to cause far more problems than benefits for society, for social concern is always second to monetary gain. If industry truly ‘cared’ about society, putting the welfare and best interests of people as the first priority, the monetary system would not work, for the entire orientation of the structure requires “differential advantage”. In other words, ‘equality’ and ‘fairness’ have no place in a system where the entire basis of survival has to do with competition. Of course, advocates of the system will tell you that the system creates “incentive”, but this incentive is really the incentive for monetary gain and nothing more. Meaningful contributions to society in this system are a chance by product, not the initial intent. Financial corruption is also always constant, with many forms simply accepted as “the way it is” and legal. Concurrently, War is the ultimate form of economic stimulus and this makes death and destruction a positive thing for those who are in commercial/political positions to benefit from it. War is in fact wanted by industry, regardless of its inhumanity. Given this reality, war will likely never go away as long as the profit system is in place, while human behavior itself will always have an abusive propensity, due to the need to gain advantage over each other for survival.
 
What incentive is there in a Resource Based Economy?
 
 
The aim of this new social design is to free humanity, from the repetitive, mundane and arbitrary occupational roles, which hold no true relevance to social development. While also encouraging a new incentive system, that is focused on self-fulfilment, symbiotic awareness, education, social awareness and creativity, as opposed to the contrived, shallow, self-interested, corruption generating goals of wealth, property and power which are not only dominant today, but abhorrently, actually praised by the population.
 
As an aside, imagine for a moment if the top engineers of the major car companies, rather than competing, got together and decided to collaborate on making the best car possible at a given point in time. Imagine if we established an incentive system that pulls people together to create the best, rather than compete and produce inherent inferiority. Think about that. An open-source world, where all lines come together and produce goods, so everyone can benefit.
For example, if you invent something in this type of environment. That will be given to everyone for them to improve upon and to utilise, in turn when anyone else invents something that is given to you to. So self-interest becomes social interest.
 
In the future, those who choose to work in the Cybernated Industrial System will do so because it is an honour to serve humanity. They will understand that it is in their self-interest to see to it that humanity lives and works together for the greater good. The reward in a Resource-Based Economy would be the continual improvement of society for all.
It is not enough to provide the necessities of life alone. Human beings need challenges in order to evolve intellectually and maintain a high level of curiosity and a need to overcome shortages. The type of education that we advocate is the intelligent use of existing resources and the protection of the environment.
 
In the words of Margaret Mead: 
” If you look closely you will see that almost anything that really matters to us, anything that embodies our deepest commitment to the way human life should be lived and cared for, depends on some form of volunteerism.”
 
What about lazy people who do not contribute?
 
 
Laziness is a rejection of all the stuff that we’re forced to do because we have to in order to survive. People sit around and watch TV, not only because they have been conditioned to do so, it’s because they have an emotional problem with the fact that have are a slave to the system. I think it’s a psychological rejection. I know tons of people that hate their jobs but they also have all these things that they love to do and they are not lazy at all. Most people are not lazy really. Think of yourself and what you’re interested in, you find that you’re really not lazy, as long as you’re focused on things that you actually like. 
 
In an optimized version of this system, no more than 5% of the population would likely be needed to run the show. The more optimized and powerful our technology and methods become, the more that number decreases. Instead of someone working 40 hours a week like today, they would only be needed to contribute a few hours a week or every 2 weeks. So even if a few people still chose not to contribute, it will not greatly effect the operation of society.  
 
What will I do in all my spare time?
 
 
If you went to an indigenous tribe say like in a hunter gatherers society where women had to go and collect water from a near by river to bring back to their huts and someone explained to them that they could have a water system installed in their village so they could have easy access to clean drinking water straight out of the tap, they may ask the question “What would we do with our time?”.
A resource-based economy would provide art, music, theatre centres, and opportunities for people to return to an educational environment, allowing them to pursue their interests. Although people would be economically secure, they would still find real challenges that would maintain incentives and enhance creativity.
 
 
Interdisciplinary teams
 
 
Interdisciplinary Teams of technicians oversee the system and orient research projects to continue growth, efficiency and social evolution. In an optimized version of this system, no more than 5% of the population would likely be needed to run the show. The more optimized and powerful our technology and methods become, the more that number decreases. These Interdisciplinary Teams would be selected and organized by the Central Database Program, based on what they have already contributed to the system. This is a true “election”, based on what a person has done, not what they say they will do.
 
The Interdisciplinary Teams do not get “paid” in any way, for their worldviews have been expanded to realize that their reward is, in fact, the fruits of the society as a whole and they contribute because they want to! 
While this might be difficult to consider for those who have been fully indoctrinated into the monetary based reward system and feel that money is the only “incentive” there is, let it be known that every day, all over the world, millions of people volunteer for the greater good. 
 
Volunteerism
 
 
In a 1992 Gallop Poll, more than 50% of American adults (94 Million Americans) volunteered time for social causes, at an average of 4.2 hours a week, for a total of 20.5 billion hours a year! This is an incredible triumph for the collective human spirit, for even with the sickness of self-interest generated by the monetary system, humans still strive to help each other and give to society without reward. What's even more amazing is that the poor and the middle class are more likely to volunteer than the wealthy. Think about that. These are the people who have the least amount of money. So, it makes you understand the cultural and psychological nuances that are created: the more money you get the more diseased you might possibly become. It's a fascinating phenomenon.
 
Innovation
 
http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/why/evidence/innovation
Here’s a chart showing that innovation is greater in more equal countries using the measure of patents per million. As you can see Finland, Sweden, and Ireland trump the United States, when it comes to innovation. Often many market-enthusiasts still seem to think that the competitive-based, incentive system of seeking profit in a stratified society translates into new innovations for the common good.
 
First of all, the most powerful contributions to society did not come from corporations seeking profit. Nikola Tesla did not establish alternating current electric power because he was out to make a buck. Louis Pasteur, Charles Darwin, the Wright Brothers, Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton did not make their massive contributions to society because of material self-interest. Did Martin Luther King walk down the street in Birmingham, Alabama while a bunch of racists threw rocks at his head because he was on his way to cash a cheque? 
 
Daniel Pink’s research (under construction)
 
 
Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic motivation; Extrinsic motivators (money, rewards, grades, praise, etc.) almost always lower productivity, creativity and interest, because the focus is now on the reward rather than the task at hand. Intrinsic motivators (liking what you do) generates effective motivation. 
 
Sources
 
 
Daniel Pink – Drive (book)
RSA Animate - Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc
 
Jeremy Rifkin-The End of Work (book)
 
Alfie Kohn-Punished by Rewards (book)
 
Jacque Fresco- Motivation, Incentive & Creativity (Article)
http://thevenusproject.com/a-new-social-design/essay#motivation
 
Innovation is greater in more equal countries (chart)
http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/why/evidence/innovation
 
Other Sources
 
 
http://www.agoranews.org/sections/incentive-and-motivation
1. Philip Slater, Wealth Addiction. New York: Dutton, 1980, p. 25
2. U.S. Workers Hate Their Jobs More Than Ever: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257345,00.html
3. Hodgkinson & Weitzman, Giving and Volunteering in the United States: Findings from a National Survey, 1992, p2
4. Kohn, Alfie. The Risk of Rewards, 1994. http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/ror.htm
5. Daniel Biella and Wolfram Luther. "A Synthesis Model for the Replication of Historical Experiments in Virtual Environments". 5th European Conference on e-Learning. Academic Conferences Limited. pp. 23. ISBN 9781905305308
6. Kohn, Alfie. Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's , Praise, and Other Bribes. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1993, p.50
7. Lewin, 1935, p. 153.
8. Newby, 1991, p. 197
9. Sears et al., 1957, p. 324

humanityresurrected

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 196

Report this Apr. 04 2013, 7:45 am


Who's job is it to end poverty? Poverty refers to being unable to afford basic human needs, which commonly includes clean and fresh water, nutrition, health care, education, clothing and shelter.

humanityresurrected

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 196

Report this Apr. 04 2013, 9:30 am

No Money or Market System
Automation of Labor
Technological Unification of Earth via "Systems" Approach.
Access over Property.
Self-Contained/Localized City and Production Systems.
Science as the Methodology for Governance

1) No money or market system.
Market theory assumes a number of things which have proven to either be false, marginally beneficial, or outright socially detrimental.


The core problems to consider are the following:


A) The need for "Infinite Growth" which is mathematically unsustainable and ecologically detrimental. The entire basis of the Market System is not the intelligent management of our mostly finite resources on this planet but rather the perpetual extraction and consumption of them for the sake of profit and "economic growth". In order to keep people employed, people must constantly consume, regardless of the state of affairs within the environment and often regardless of product utility. This is the absolute reverse of what a sustainable practice would require, which is the strategic preservation and efficient use of resources.


A "Corruption Generating" Incentive System. It is often said that the competitive marketplace creates the incentive to act for the sake of social progress. While this is partially true, it also generates an equal if not more pronounced amount of corruption in the form of planned obsolescence, common crime, wars, large scale financial fraud, labor exploitation and many other issues. The vast majority of people in prison today there because of monetary related crime or non-violent drug offenses. The majority of legislation exists in the context of monetary-based crimes.


Also, if one was to critically examine history and peer into the documented biographies/mentalities of the greatest scientists and inventors of our time, such a N. Tesla, A. Einstein, A. Bell, the Wright Brothers, and many others - it is found that they did not find their motivation in the prospect of monetary gain. The interest to make money must not be confused with the interest to create socially beneficial products and very often they are even at odds.


C) A disjunct, inefficient industrial complex which wastes tremendous amount of resources and energy. In the world today, with the advent of Globalization, it has become more profitable to import and export both labor and goods across the globe rather than to produce locally. We import bananas from Ecuador to the US and bottled water from Fuji Japan, while western companies will go to the deprived 3rd world to exploit cheap labor, etc. Likewise, the process of extraction, to component generation, to assembly, to distribution of a given good might cross through multiple countries for a single final product, simply due to labor and production costs / property costs. This "cost efficiency" generates extreme "technical inefficiency" and is only justifiable within the market system for the sake of saving money.


In a RBEM, the focus is maximum technical efficiency. The production process is not dispersed, but made as centralized and fluid as possible, with elements moving the very least amount, saving what would be tremendous amounts of energy and labor as compared to methods today. Food is grown locally whenever possible (which is most of the time given the flexibility of indoor agriculture technology today) while all extraction, production and distribution is logically organized to use as little labor/transport/space as possible, while producing the "strategically best" possible goods. (see more below) In other words, the system is planned, to maximize efficiently and minimize waste.


D) A propensity for "Establishments". Very simply, established corporate/financial orders have a built in tendency to stop new, socially positive advents from coming to fruition, if there is a foreshadowed loss of market share, profit and hence power. It is important to consider the basic nature of a corporation and its inherent need for self perpetuation.


If a person starts a company, hires employees, creates a market and becomes profitable, what has thus been created, in part, is the means for survival for a group of people. Since each person in that group typically becomes dependent on their organization for income, a natural, protectionist propensity is created whereas anything that threatens the institution thus threatens the well being of the group/individual. This is the fabric of a "competition" mindset. While people think of free market competition as a battle between two or more companies in a given industry, they often miss the other level- which is the competition against new advents which would make them obsolete, outright.


The best way to expand on this point is to simply give an example, such as the US Government and 'Big Oil' collusion to limit the expansion of the fully Electric Car (EV) in the US. This issue was well presented and sourced in the documentary called "Who Killed the Electric Car?". The bottom line here is that the need to preserve an established order for the sake of the well being of those on the pay role, leads to an inherent tendency to stifle progress. A new technology which can make a prior technology obsolete will be met with resistance unless there is a way for the market system to adsorb it in a slow fashion, allowing for a transition for the corporations ( ie - the perpetuation of "Hybrid" cars in the US, as opposed to the fully electric ones which could exist now, in abundance.) There are also large amounts of evidence that the FDA has engaged in favoritism/collusion with pharmaceutical companies, to limit/stop the availability of advanced progressive drugs which would void existing/profitable ones.


In a RBE, there is nothing to hold back developmental/implementation of anything. If safe and useful, it would immediately be implemented into society, with no monetary institution to thwart the change due to their self-preserving, monetary nature.


E) An inherent obsolescence which creates inferior products immediately due to the need to stay "competitive" This little recognized attribute of production is another example of the waste which is created in the market system. It is bad enough that multiple companies constantly duplicate each others items in an attempt to make their variations more interesting for the sake of public consumption, but a more wasteful reality is that due to the competitive basis of the system, it is a mathematical certainty that every good produced is immediately inferior the moment it is created, due the need to cut the initial cost basis of production and hence stay "competitive" against another company... which is doing the same thing for the same reason. The old free market adage where producers "create the best possible goods at the lower possible prices" is a needlessly wasteful reality and detrimentally misleading, for it is impossible for a company to use the most efficient material or processes in the production of anything, for it would be too expensive to maintain a competitive cost basis.


They very simply cannot make the "strategically best" physically - it is mathematically impossible. If they did, no one would buy it for it would be unaffordable due the values inherent in the higher quality materials and methods. Remember - people buy what they can afford to. Every person on this planet has a built in limit of affordability in the monetary system, so it generates a feedback loop of constant waste via inferior production, to meet inferior demand. In a RBEM, goods are created to last, with the expansion and updating of certain goods built directly into the design, with recycling strategically accessed as well, limiting waste.


You will notice the term "strategically best" was used in a statement above. This qualification means that goods are created with respect to state of affairs of the planetary resources, with the quality of materials used based on an equation taking into acct all relevant attributes, rates of depletion, negative retroactions and the like. In other words, we would not blindly use titanium for, say, every single computer enclosure made, just because it might be the "strongest" materials for the job. That narrow practice could lead to depletion. Rather, there would be a gradient of material quality which would be accessed through analysis of relevant attributes - such as comparable resources, rates of natural obsolescence for a given item, statical usage in the community, etc. These properties and relationships could be accessed through programming, with the most strategically viable solution computed and output in real time. It is mere issue of calcualtion.


F) A propensity for monopoly and cartel due to the basic motivation of growth and increased market share. This is a point that economic theorists will often deny, under the assumption that open competition is self regulating that that monopolies and cartels are extremely rare anomalies in a free-market system. This "invisible hand" assumption holds little validity historically, not to mention the outstanding legislation around the issue, which proves its infeasibility. In America, there have been numerous monopolies, such as Standard Oil and Microsoft. Cartels, which are essentially Monopolies by way of collusion between the largest competitors in an industry, are also persistent to this day, while less obvious to the casual observer. In any case, the "free market" itself does not resolve these issues - it always takes the government to step in and break up the monopolies.


This aside, the more important point is that in an economy based on "growth", it is only natural for a corporation to want to expand and hence dominate. After all, that is the basis of economic stability in the modern world - expansion. Expansion of any corporation, always gravitates toward monopoly or cartel, for, again, the basic drive of competition is to out do your competitor. In other words, monopoly and cartel are absolutely natural in the competitive system. In fact, it is inevitable, for again, the very basis is to seek dominance over market share. The true detriment of this reality goes back to the point above- the inherent propensity of an "Establishment" to preserve its institution. If a medical cartel is influencing the FDA, then new ideas which void that cartel's income sources will often be fought, regardless of the social benefits being thwarted.


G) The market system is driven, in part, by Scarcity. The less there is of something, the more money that can be generated in the short term. This sets up a propensity for corporations to limit availability and hence deny production abundance. It is simply against the very nature of what drives demand to create abundance. The Kimberly Diamond Mines in Africa have been documented in the past to burn diamonds in order to keep prices high. Diamonds are rare resources which take billions of years to be created. This is nothing but problematic. The world we live in should be based on the interest to generate an abundance for the world's people, along with strategic preservation and streamlined methods to enable that abundance. This is a central reason why, as of 2010, there are over a billion people starving on the planet. It has nothing to do with an inability to produce food, and everything having to do with an inherent need to create/preserve scarcity for the sake of short term profits.


Abundance, Efficiency and Sustainability are, very simply, the enemies of profit. This scarcity logic also applies to the quality of goods. The idea of creating something that could last, say, a lifetime with little repair, is anathema to the market system, for it reduces consumption rates, which slows growth and creates systemic repercussions (loss of jobs, etc.). The scarcity attribute of the market system is nothing but detrimental for these reasons, not to mention that it doesn't even serve the role of efficient resource preservation, which is often claimed.


While supply and demand dictates that the less there is of something, the more it will be valued and hence the increased value will limit consumption, reducing the possibility of "running out"--- the incentive to create scarcity, coupled with the inherent short term reward which results from scarcity driven based prices, nullifies the idea that this enables strategic preservation. We will likely never "run out" of oil, in the current market system. Rather, the prices will become so high that no one can afford it, while those corporations who own the remaining oil, will make a great deal of money off of the scarcity, regardless of the long term social ramifications. In other words, remaining scare resources, existing in such high economic value that it limits their consumption, is not to be confused with preservation that is functional and strategic. True strategic preservation can only come from the direct management of the resource in question in regard to the most efficient technical applications of the resource in industry itself, not arbitrary, surface price relationships, absent of rational allocation.


2) Automation of Labor
As the trend of what appears to be an exponential increase in the evolution of information technology, robotics and computerization, it has become apparent that human labor is becoming more and more inefficient in regard to meeting the demands necessary for supporting the global population. From the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, we have seen an increasing trend of "technological unemployment", which is the phenomenon where humans are replaced by machines in the work force. This trend, while debatable in regard to its ultimate long term effect on employment, creates a propensity to displace the worker and hence the consumer, slowing consumption.


That stated, this issue is actually overshadowed by a larger social imperative: That the use of machine labor (mechanization) is provably more efficient than human performance in virtually all sectors. If one was to track, for example, the performance output of factory production such as within the steel industry in the US for the past 200 years, we find that not only do less than 5% of the workforce now work in such factories, the efficiency and output capacities have increased substantially. The trend, in fact, now shows that "Employment is Inverse to Productivity." The more mechanization that occurs, the more productive an industry becomes.


Today, there are repetitive occupations which simply do not need to exist given the state of automation and computerization ("cybernation"). Not only would mechanization in these areas reduce the mundane burden and allow more free time for people, it also would, more importantly, increase productivity. Machines do not need breaks, vacations, sleep, etc. The use of mechanization is own means to create many forms of abundance on this planet, from food to physical goods.


However to do this, the traditional labor system we have simply cannot exist. The reality is that our labor for income system is stifling progress in its requirement to "keep people working" for the sake of "economic stability". We are reaching a stage where the efficiency of automation is overriding and making obsolete the system of labor for income. This trend shows no sign of slowing, especially in regard to the now dominant Service Industry, which is increasingly being automated in the form of kiosks, robotics and other forms. Likewise, due to phenomena related to Moore's law and the growing in-expense of computers and machines, it is likely that it is simply a matter of time before corporations simply can not rationalize keeping human labor anymore, as the automation systems will become too cheap. Of course, this is a paradoxical market phenomenon, called by some theorists as "the contradiction of capitalism", for it is, in effect, removing the consumer (laborer) itself and hence reducing consumption.


Apart from those issues, it is important to also consider human labor contributions based on social relevance, not monetary gain. In a RBE, there would be no reason to have such occupations as Banking, Trading, Insurance, Cashiers, Brokers, Advertising... or anything related to the governance of money.


All human actions in the form of institutionalized labor should also have the highest social return. There is no logic in wasting resources, time and energy on operations that do not have a direct and tangible function. This adjustment alone would remove millions of jobs, for the idea of "working for money" as a purpose would no longer exist.


In turn, all the poor demographic, shoddy goods, vanity items and culturally contrived creations designed to influence people for reasons of status, for the sole sake of profit, would also no longer exist, saving countless amounts of time and resources.


One final note on this issue: Some hear this and they assume that this voids the Communicative Arts and personal and social expression as far as painting, sculpture, music and the like. No. These mediums of expression will likely thrive like never before, for the amount of free time made available to people will permit a renaissance of creativity, invention, along with community and social capital. The burden of labor obligation will also reduce stress and create a more amiable culture.


There is a difference between creating for the sake of keeping society sustainable and efficient, focusing on resource preservation, product efficiency and strategic allocation of labor for those things which generate a tangible social return - and creating for personal expression, exploration, experimentation and hence art, which has been a staple of human evolution since the dawn of time.


3) Technological Unification of Earth via "Systems" Approach
We live in a symbiotic/synergistic planetary ecosystem, with a cause-effect balance reflecting a single system of earthy operation. Buckminster Fuller defined this well when he referred to the planet as "Spaceship Earth". It is time we reflect this natural state of affairs in our societal affairs on this planet. The fact of the matter is that the human societies, which are dispersed across the globe, require resources which are also un-uniformly dispersed across the globe. Our current procedure for enabling resource distribution comes in the form of corporations which seek and claim "ownership" of our earthly resources, which they in turn "sell" to others, in the name of profit. The problems inherent in this practice are numerous due to, again, the self-interest based disposition inherent in selling anything for personal gain, as denoted before. But, this is only partially the issue in the larger scheme of things when it come to the reality that we live on a finite planet and resource management and preservation should be the number one concern in regard to human survival- especially with the population explosion of the last 200 years. Two people are born every second on this planet and each one of those humans needs a lifetime of food, energy, water and the like. Given this fundamental need to understand what we have, the rates of depletion and, invariably, the need to streamline industry in the most efficient, productive way, a Global System of Resource Management must be put in place. It is just common sense. ?This is an extensive subject when one considers the technical, quantitative variables needed for implementation. However, for the sake of overview, it can be stated that the first step is a Full Global Survey of all earthly resources. Then, based on a quantitative analysis of the properties of each material, a strategically defined process of production is constructed from the bottom up, using such variables as negative retro-actions, renew-ability, etc. (More on this can be found in the section called Project Earth in the ZM lecture called "Where Are We Going?") Then consumption statistics are accessed, rates of depletion monitoring, distribution logically formulated, etc. In other words, it is a full Systems Approach to earthly resource management, production and distribution, with the goal of absolute efficiency, conservation and sustainability. Given the mathematically defined attributes, as based on all available information at the time, along with the state of technology at the time, the parameters for social operation in the industrial complex become self evident, with decisions arrived at by way of computation, not human opinion. ?This is where computer intelligence becomes an important tool for social governance, for only the computation ability/programming of computers can access and strategically regulate such processes efficiently, and in real time. This technological application is not novel, it is simply 'scaled out' from current methods already known.


4) Access over Property
The concept of property, unannounced to most people today, is a fairly new social concept. Before the neolithic revolution, as extrapolated from current hunter and gatherer societies existing today, property relationships did not exist as we know them. Neither did money or even trade in many cases. Communities existed in an egalitarian fashion, living within the carrying capacity of the regions and the natural production built in. It was only after direct agricultural development was discovered, eventually proceeding with resource acquisition by ship traders and the like - up to the modern day of power establishments and corporations, - that property became the highly defined staple of society as we know it today.


With that understood, which dismisses the common notion that property is a result of some kind of empirical "human nature", the notion of "no property" is also today often blindly associated with "Communism" and the works of Karl Marx. It is important to point out the TZM advocation of no property is derived from logical inference, based almost explicitly upon strategic resource management and efficiency, not any surface influence by these supposed "Communist" ideals. There is no relation between the two, for communism was not derived from the needs to preserve and manage resources efficiently. Communism, in theory and practice, was based on a social/moral relativism which was culturally specific - not environmentally specific - which is the case with a RBE.


The real issue relevant to meeting human needs is not ownership - it is access. People use things, they do not "own" them. Ownership is a non-operational, protectionist advent, derived from generations of scarcity over resources, currently compounded by market based adverting which supports status/class division for the sake of monetary gain . To put it another way, ownership is a form of controlled restriction, both physically and ideologically. Property as a system of controlled restriction, coupled with the monetary value inherent and hence the market consequences is unsustainable, limiting and impractical.


In a RBEM, the focus moves from static ownership to strategic access, with a system designed for society to obtain access as needed. For example, rather than owning various forms of recreational sporting equipment, Access Centers are set up, typically in regions where such actions occur, where a person simply "checks out" the equipment- uses it and returns it. This "library" type arrangement can be applied to virtually any type of human need. Of course, those reading this who have been conditioned into a more individualistic, materialistic mindset often objects with claims such as " what if I want green, custom golf clubs and only white are available?". This is a culturally contrived, biased reservation. The issue in question is utility, not vanity. Human expression has been molded by the needs of the current market based system (consumption) into values which are simply nonfunctional and irrelevant. Yes, this would require a value adjustment to quality, rather than identity. The fact is, even for those who object from the standpoint of their interest in personal identity, the overarching social ramifications of such an social approach will create benefits that will greatly overshadow any such arbitrary personal preference, creating new values to replace the outdated ones.


These include : (a) No Property Crime: In a world of access rather than ownership, without money, there is no incentive to steal, for there is no resale value. You can not steal something no one owns and you certainly couldn't sell it. (b) Access Abundance: It has been denoted that the average automobile sits in parking spaces for the majority of its life span, wasting space and time. Rather than having this wasteful consequence of the ownership system, one car could facilitate a large number of users in a given region, with only a fraction of the production/resource needs. [c) Peak Efficiency of Production: Unlike today, where the market system must perpetuate inherently inferior products for the sake of economic turnover, we could actually design goods to last, using the best materials and processes strategically available. We no longer make "cheap" products to serve a poor demographic ( which is the majority). This attribute alone will save cataclysmic amounts of resources, while also enabling a society to have access to goods and services they would never have had in a world based on money, inherent obsolescence and property.


5) Self-Contained/Localized City and Production Systems.
There are many brilliant engineers who have worked to tackle the issue of industrial design, from Jacque Fresco, to Buckminster fuller to Nicola Tesla. Behind such designs, such as Jacque Frescos' famed Circles cities or Fuller's Geodesic Dome, rests a basic train of thought : Strategic Efficiency and Maximization of Productivity.


For example, Fresco' "circular city" is constructed of a series of "belts", each serving a social function, such a energy production, research, recreation, living, etc. Each city is a hence a system, where all needs are produced in the city complex, in a localized fashion, whenever possible. For example, renewable energy generation occurs near the outer perimeter. Food production is produced closer to the middle in industrial sized greenhouses.


This is very different in its logic from the "globalization" based economy we live in today, which wastes outrageous amounts of energy and resources due to unneeded transport and labor processing. Likewise, transportation within the city is strategically created to eliminate the use of detached automobiles, except for rare cases, such as emergency vehicles. Homes are created to be micro-systems as well, with as much power generation occurring internally, such as from sunlight absorbed by the building structure using photovoltaic technology. More information on these city system can be found at www.thevenusproject.com.


The Geodesic Dome, perfected by Buckminster Fuller, offer another effienecy ordeinted medium within the same train of thought. Fuller's goal was to build designs to do more with fewer resources. He noticed problems inherent in conventional construction techniques, and recognized the indigenous strength of naturally occuring structures. The advanctages include : much stronger than a conventional building but yet use less material to construct; domes can be built very quickly because they are of a modular prefab construction and suit being mass produced; They also use less energy to keep warm/cool than a conventional box structure. More information on can be found at http://www.bfi.org/


In the end, the fundamental interest is, again, sustainability and efficiency on all levels, from the "housing deign" to the "earth design". The market system actually fights this efficiency due to the broken, competitive nature inherent.


6) Science as the Methodology for Governance
The application of "the scientific method for social concern" is oft-repeated mantra for the basis of social operation in a RBEM. While the obviousness of this in regard to industry is simple enough to understand, it is important to also realize its value in regard to human behavior. Science, historically speaking, has often been derailed as a cold, restrictive discipline, reserved for the sake of mere technology and invention. Little regard seems to be currently given to its use in the understanding of human behavior.


Superstitious thought, which has been powerfully dominant in human evolution, has worked on the basis that the human being was somehow detached from the physical world. We have "souls"; "spirits"; we are "divine"; we are related/guided by an all seeing, all knowing, controlling god, etc.


Conversely, yet oddly similarly, there is an argument that humans have "free will" in their decisions and that we have the open ability to choose our actions, absent of the influence of our environment or even education. Now, while the vastness of the prior two statements and many reading those could find numerous cultural arguments to claim the contrary, this doesn't change the basic reality that we humans have historically liked to think that we are special and unique from the rest of the organisms and natural phenomena around this.


However, as time has gone on, it has become increasingly obvious that we are not special and that there is no such thing as "special" in the natural world,. for everything is special based on the uniqueness of all organisms. There is no reason to assume the human being is any more important or intrinsically different or special than a mole, a tree, an ant, a leaf or a cancer cell. This isn't "New Age" rhetoric - it is fundamental logic. We are physical phenomena - nothing more or less.


We are greatly influenced by our culture and our values and behaviors can only mostly be a result of our conditioning, as external phenomena interacts with our genetic predispositions. For example, we have a notion called "talent", which is another word for a genetic predisposition to a given behavior, or set of behaviors.. A piano prodigy might have an inherent ability that enables them to learn more quickly and perform in a more acute way than another, who has spent the same time in practice, but doesn't have the genetic predisposition. Be that as it may, that "talented" person still had to learn 'what a piano was' and how to play it. In other words, genes are not autonomous initiators of commands. It takes an environmental trigger to allow for the propensity to materialize.


At any rate, it is not the point of this article to expand on the argument of "nature and nurture". The point is that we have proven to be scientifically defined and a product of a traceable causality and it is this understanding that can allow us to slow and even stop the aberrant, or "criminal" behavior we see in society today such a abuse, murder, theft and the like. The logic, once the effects of human conditioning are understood, is to remove the environmental attributes which are enabling the reactions.


Just as an abused dog who has been starved for a week might have a knee jerk reaction to react very violently to an otherwise innocuous passerby, we humans have the same behavior dynamic. If you don't want people to steal food, do not deprive them of it. It has been found that prisons are now generating more violence than they are curbing. If you teach a child to be a hateful racist, then he will carry those values into the rest his life, very often. Human values and hence human behavior are shaped by the environment in a cause and effect based way, no different than a leaf being blown by the wind.


In a RBEM, the central focus in regard to removing aberrant human actions is not to "punish them", but to find the reasons for their offensive actions and work to eliminate them. Humans are products of their environment and personal/social reform is a scientific process

Lang-haoLeeyoh

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 182

Report this Apr. 04 2013, 10:27 am

Here are the obstacles as I see them (to save space just using the American Model alone) the White North East and West coast get their wealth from (in part) the disenfranchisement of non-white and/or non/anglos in that area; and the North East and West coast get their wealth (in part) by the farming of the South and Midwest and the ranching and/or farming of the south-west, not just via food, but cus’ farm products is U.S.’s main export (and they suffer by having edu and infrastructure, just enough to allow them to farm and/or ranch); and the U.S. gets most of its wealth by disenfranchising the 3rd and developing world.


But when polled Americans say they #1 concern is money, and the concerns that they list are 1% of the dif from if they gave up all the above; and crime, but when they list crime they are talking about the non-white section of cities, but studies also show, by far (across all types of crimes) most of each are done in the white suburbs.


I'm a Dr. Not a Web account

Lang-haoLeeyoh

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 182

Report this Apr. 04 2013, 10:41 am

Corruption is mainly used to this end, to help disenfranchise ppl, e.g. developing governments taking bribes to allow foreign co.'s to get lands and resources at 10% of the international market price.


 


Re. superstitions, one person's superstition is another's religion; I'm Buddhist and studies in a shaolin style monastery via a friend of the family and worshiped in families' Buddhist temple, so could have told you everything that you know by watching TV about Christianity, before you saw it, but if you watch edu TV you probably know Jesus was trying to return to an older form of Judaism free of any European Influence, but in less than a generation after his death Christianity rejected nearly all Judaism and fully replaced it with European religions, the bible was written by historians making political arguments, without quoting their words or those of the historical texts they were drawing upon, and they were historical not religious, revelations was a cry for terrorism against Rome; the godly nature of Jesus came from a retelling of the same source as the tales of Hercules, Isis and Horus were based upon, and that prophecy wrote of 3-forms of god that were to have existed at the same time, the dead sea scrolls people claimed they’re leader was 1 and the other never made an appearance as far as we know, and unless all three appeared and were of equal importance, it was not a true by its own words, and those words were retelling an old story of prophesies already stated to have come to pass hundreds to a thousand years before.

Lang-haoLeeyoh

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 182

Report this Apr. 04 2013, 10:45 am

Personally I believe in the Chinese gods that predate Buddhism, but think that each group has their own gods, even the bible states the god of the bible was only the god to the jews, and that there are many other gods that rule over other areas.


But I mainly concentrate upon Buddhism, which does not state any specific gods, so doesn't interfere with anyone's god-beliefs; but I should say I am Chinese, and the oppression of havin no religion is far far worse than following a bad religion.

Lang-haoLeeyoh

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 182

Report this Apr. 04 2013, 10:55 am

 


What about lazy people who do not contribute?


 


 


Laziness is a rejection of all the stuff that we’re forced to do because we have to in order to survive. People sit around and watch TV, not only because they have been conditioned to do so, it’s because they have an emotional problem with the fact that have are a slave to the system. I think it’s a psychological rejection. I know tons of people that hate their jobs but they also have all these things that they love to do and they are not lazy at all. Most people are not lazy really. Think of yourself and what you’re interested in, you find that you’re really not lazy, as long as you’re focused on things that you actually like.


 


In an optimized version of this system, no more than 5% of the population would likely be needed to run the show. The more optimized and powerful our technology and methods become, the more that number decreases. Instead of someone working 40 hours a week like today, they would only be needed to contribute a few hours a week or every 2 weeks. So even if a few people still chose not to contribute, it will not greatly effect the operation of society.


^ I strongly disagree with this, lazyness and not contributing are ussually applied to people who have diferent values than those making the accusations and are not part of thier plan; e.g. you'll never hear a politician talking about a 40yr old with a beer gut who sits in front of the tv all weekend drinking beer, but durring the week working at their plant and voting for him lazy, nor will you ever hear them refering to a millionairs son as lazy, nor to a farmer who sits at home all day and pays immigrent farm hands to do all his work while he drinks beer and watches TV; but if someone works 100 hours a week on political campaigns when not working that much in non-proffits but is the child of poor parents and thus was on wealfare since birth, will be called lazy.

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: darmokattanagra, TheDriver, EDisConstant

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum