Why not just cut to the chase and get rid of money altogether .
allan.coop
12

So Jason responded directly to me . . .

“As I mentioned in the section of Why we need to keep capitalism. I really don’t think it’s a way station. At every level, other than complete post-scarcity, you need a system in place to determine who wins when two people want something and to determine what to produce. Capitalism does this in a fairly efficient way. Any discussion of ‘getting rid of money’ needs to start with what will replace it for those two things.”

My reply. Well at least you have identified the root problem . . . “who wins when two people want something and to determine what to produce.” I suspect the answer to this is well known in certain circles. It is referred to as “consensus decision making.”

We do not have to behave as though we are uncivilised ruffians surviving in a jungle. Individually, we have the capacity and creative insight to behave in more productive and less dysfunctional ways.

Capitalism may be the best first approximation for seeming to solve such problems, but it is neither the most equitable, the “best,” nor will it be the last . . .

As for the rest I stick to rephrasing my original question, “What would need to change if money just disappeared?” My answer is nothing. Money is a convenient fiction fabricated by human imagination. As such, it’s disappearance need not have much effect. It is just that you have carelessly learned to think that you need to have more . . . and are prepared to go to any lengths to materialise that desire . . .

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.