Thanks very much for your most interesting comment. It looks as though you were trying to include a link to an article from The Economist, but something seems to have gone wrong. If it wasn't this week's cover story, which article did you have in mind?

I agree with you that the "free market economy is just a human construction". I guess the question now is whether humans have it in them to imagine and then construct something better?

For an interesting take on the Austrian Economists and their effect on Anglo-Saxon capitalism, as well as ways in which us humans have endeavoured to learn from nature, you might like to take a look at Adam Curtis' recent BBC TV series "All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace".

Cheers,

Jim

YES. I have studied economics at a post graduate level and am on my way to completing my doctoral thesis.While doing all my studies and research so far I have come to accept RBE to be a viable alternative. Some of the Austrian economists maintain their position about the monetary system as the final frontier of human society. The thing is humans are the only species in the universe who use money to live on their planet. Things like value for goods and services in terms of economics have a very limited frame of reference. For example we value diamonds at a conspicuous level and have put a high price tag due to its scarcity. But is a diamond really valuable? It is just a worthless piece of stone with no actual value whatsoever. In addition to that it is responsible for the deaths of thousands of labourers who are exposed to inhumane conditions, destruction of eco-system diversity (3000 plant and animal species are directly effected) and high energy consumption (for artificial diamonds).

This among various other applied examples suggests that money has no purpose in identifying the actual value of any good or service. value is a subjective term that can be manipulated by advertisements, popular culture, traditional beliefs etc. So, as a professional economist I say, "Economics as a discipline is nothing but bullshit and should be done away with". As to those who still advocate or think in terms of free market economy, capitalism, communism, socialism, statism etc. know there there is no such thing. It is just human construction based on semantic understanding. A proper way to go about is to know more about nature and natural law. Not man made constructions that are subject to individual interpretations. The methods of science through uninterpretable data (meaning same results from tests conducted) is the best option for our species. When plants grow, they don't pay for their existence. They are the most scientific creatures and their level of understanding their environment is beyond human ingenuity today. They have highly computerized mechanism of sensing and remote sensing. It is through the laws of nature that we humans get all our information. So it is not us who are the intelligent creatures. We need to learn more from nature as to how they function in a neural network and get by without the use of money. How they give and take in a highly advanced form of communication and not in the conventional sense of barter.

Therefore, a RBE is a definite system that uses non-established evolutionary perspective to attain resources for the human species to "get by" keeping in mind the "standard of living" and proper resource management. Oh and yeah…"I have checked and found that it is technically achievable but socially a little bit difficult but not impossible".

It seems to me you are missing an important point…the idea you present is bounded by the indoctrintation that you must have a monetary system to ration resources…I think the point that Jacque is trying to make is that we are in the mess we are in because society has simply accepted that we need to have a monetary system without questioning it.

Thanks for writing!

The last quote in my previous comment seems to encompass what you describe. Scientists and engineers working together, doing what they enjoy, to make everyone's life better instead of to make a profit.

Water would be free of charge. So would everything else.

Apologies for my somewhat tardy reply, but I've been a bit busy travelling, and recording and editing a video.

Jacque Fresco's ideas go well beyond "triangulation" and barter. In "Designing the Future" he puts it this way:

A resource-based economy uses resources rather than money, and people have access to whatever they need without the use of money, credit, barter or any other form of debt or servitude.

Jacque's vision relies on technology to help effect the transition, and in particular vastly increased supplies of energy:

The resource-based economy goes quickly to work on clean sources of energy. This is only possible when there are no more monetary limitations in the way of accomplishing what's needed. There would be no need for patents since the end goal is not to make money in order to continue working, but to achieve results that are freely and quickly available to the planet's entire population.

Plenty more food for thought there, but I don't think he envisages turning energy directly into matter!

I think we have to give some credit (no pun intended) to the idea or concept of money. It has allowed us to go about our lives and quickly exchange our labour or work for something we want or desire.

The true cashless society is some way off. Only when we can easily transform energy into anything and any object will we truly escape it's clutches.

Starships have replicators and thats all we need down here on planet earth.

Systems are often dependent on other systems and in the main most people will have and use money.

A system which operates outside of the main system has to find a way to mesh or connect otherwise you get a collapse.

Communism is fine (if you agree with it) but it has to pay heed to interaction with the world and it's people who are outside communism. This interaction ultimately fails and one system or the other collapses.

A cashless society clearly doesn't exist right now but one can find ways to mesh with the existing system.

There has to be a way to transfer from one system to another. Almost like a car engine which transfers the up and down motion of the cylinders to a crankshaft spinning round and round.

A bit of tweaking and innovation might be in order. For example, there are sometimes ways to triangulate deals.

A TV channel wants to swap it's advertising space for products or services. The supplier does not want or need advertising but they want new cars. So they go out and find a business that supplies cars and does want advertising. A swap from one thing to another.

Food for thought!

Regards

Steve

Do you see a "cashless" economy coming about anytime soon though?

Let's assume Bucky and Jacque are right, and looking at things with a fresh approach there really is more than enough of everything to go round. How do you make the transition from the current way of doing things to a society with no money at all?

Here in South West England there are some "transition towns" that effectively issue their own currency. They're trying to get away from using the stuff printed by the banks, but it still seems as though the "liquidity" of cash that you refer to is hard to escape from.

If you think about it, money's only use is it's liquidity. It can be readily exchanged for products and services.

Resources are all around us and are abundant.

From a business perspective we have engaged in leveraging resources which typically take the form of alliances or joint ventures.

The challenge as I see it is looking critically at every key structure with a fresh approach.

Those in power have a massive vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Our education system is bound by it's own limiting structure/system which teaches rubbish. Teach rubbish and you end up with… rubbish.

I guess theres lots to be getting on with:-)

Regards