Resource based economy – utopian nirvana or eco-fascism?

It takes on average 10 years to qualify as a Master Mariner or Chief Engineer, why would you bother?

It might currently take that long, but no doubt that period could be shortened and made easier. Bearing in mind in this new world order the education system would no doubt be revolutionised then I’d harbour a guess that it wouldn’t be completely impossible to easily re-educate and re-train people to undertake new roles in society. As to why you would bother, I’ll simply repeat what I said before, you’d bother because you’d *want* to do it. For every 100/1000 people who’d sit on a beach, there’s probably one who’d like to travel the seas in solitude on a big ship.

Thing is a lot of people already do give up time and put in a lot of hard work to make the place better, safer, whatever. That’s why we have things like ISO Standards, and Institutes / Research Centers providing guidelines, best practice etc.

Plus some jobs just aren’t for volunteers, anyone fancy some random volunteers managing aircraft, pipeline or nuclear reactor safety & integrity?

dragon – Member

Plus some jobs just aren’t for volunteers, anyone fancy some random volunteers managing aircraft, pipeline or nuclear reactor safety & integrity?

Volunteers doesn’t mean unqualified or unskilled people 😕 No you wouldn’t want some random doing it, but that’s OK because nobody suggests that.

Why would anyone volunteer to be a nuclear engineer on a full time basis when the rest of you are riding your bikes around Whistler?

It might currently take that long, but no doubt that period could be shortened and made easier.

So you shorten training period and lower standards for your volunteers? There is a reason it takes 10 years to achieve certain professional qualifications.

The whole idea is bobbins.

Why would anyone volunteer to be a nuclear engineer on a full time basis when the rest of you are riding your bikes around Whistler?

You’re missing the point I think. Ignoring for a second that in a sustainable, ecological resource-based economy nuclear energy would probably not be used and so nuclear engineers wouldn’t be required, the whole point is that no one would have to do anything full time as the system would require much less labour to sustain it. Even so, no doubt some people would want to spend more time doing some things that others think are boring or pointless.

The whole idea is bobbins.

And consuming the planet’s resources with a system that assumes infinite growth isn’t?

gobuchul – Member

Why would anyone volunteer to be a nuclear engineer on a full time basis when the rest of you are riding your bikes around Whistler?

Because they want to? Because they find it fascinating, or want to give something back? Lots of people would ask “why would you want to ride a bike round whistler” in the same incredulous tones. Or “why would you spend your entire life doing a job you don’t want to do, just so you can buy things you don’t need”

it wouldn’t have to be a full-time basis, of course. There’s nothing magical about a 5 day week that makes it the right way to do things.

Every murderous despotic dictator started off with grand ideas of creating an equality based utopia, everyone has failed, every attempt has created war, misery and untold suffering.
Every generation believe they have the answer.
It’s a fact, there is no solution.
Why do you think they created religions ?

Because they want to? Because they find it fascinating, or want to give something back?

I can just see the line of volunteers attracted to the glamour and thrill of digging fatbergs out of sewers!

Oh, yeah, ‘there will be a machine for that’…

What I really like is the whole ‘we only need to make one type of saucepan’ bit of the article – bring back the Trabant!

There’s no reason why a resource based economy would be eco-anything, and within a day of kicking it off you’d have re-invented currency anyway. Something would become the defacto go to portable thing everyone tends to pay with. Everything will be valued according to pounds of rice, or GB on SD cards, or whatever.

And then someone will start looking after your rice for you, and one day someone’ll give someone else the receipt for their rice instead of bothering to fetch the actual rice itself…

There’s a reason money exists.

I can just see the line of volunteers attracted to the glamour and thrill of digging fatbergs out of sewers!

I think in a largely mechanised, sustainable and ecological society, fatbergs probably wouldn’t exist in sewers as there’d be a proper waste system which was designed to handle fat so it didn’t build up.

Oh, that happens overnight does it?

No legacy issues from the past in the new nirvana?

Does the existing nuclear waste just evaporate the moment the new economy is introduced?

It strikes me as an idea dreamed up by people who haven’t had to do any difficult jobs in difficult conditions.

I can think of loads of jobs that may sound glamorous and interesting but the reality is different. Yes – there are still good days with a lot of job satisfaction but enough to keep you doing it for “nothing”? I doubt it.

I have worked in a number of sectors of the marine industry, I love my current job but would I do it if I could be doing something else that is much easier and still have the same standard of living? I doubt it.

Rope access technicians are a good example, a lot of them are climbers and they really enjoy their work but it’s a means to an end, gives them money and time off so they go climbing properly. They wouldn’t be offshore if they could be up a mountain somewhere and not have to worry about the finances.

ninfan – Member

Oh, that happens overnight does it?

Course it doesn’t. And nobody ever suggested it would, or could.

I don’t think anyone ever claimed this could be put in place overnight. It’d take decades. And for all the people crying ‘it’s too hard’, ‘what about this…’ etc, look at how things changed in WW2. The changes that the US and UK made to re-model their economies to aid the war effort were pretty remarkable.

dazh – Member

For every 100/1000 people who’d sit on a beach, there’s probably one who’d like to travel the seas in solitude on a big ship.

yes, i can understand why some people would choose to crew ships, and sail around the world.

finding these people wouldn’t be the problem.

finding people happy to work for more than say… 30 seconds on an assembly line would be near-impossible.

Not as remarkable as what is being suggested here

The changes that the US and UK made to re-model their economies to aid the war effort were pretty remarkable.

Brilliant example, thank you… Now, how did we get people to work in the coal mines during WW2?

Did women choose to go and work in the factories and fields, or were they compelled to through conscription under the national service act?

Iain Banks just about made this sound plausible, although that required infinite supplies of energy and living space, and virtually godlike AIs running things…

Hey guys, looking for volunteers for the ‘Dirty Thirty’ cleanup. Anyone? Anyone?

Guys?

Is anyone there?

Thought not.

i can understand why some people would choose to crew ships, and sail around the world.

With the right conditions, sure. But who says teleporters will ever happen? Speaking as an ex engineer the problem isn’t the job but the fact that whilst you’re stuck on a ship the world is passing you by. I’d do it again tomorrow if I could come home to my own bed at night.

As for accelerating to chief. No. There is a good reason why it’s an experience and qualification based promotion:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/nine-die-in-fireball-as-ships-collide-panamanianregistered-bulkcarrier-which-struck-british-petrol-tanker-may-have-broken-fog-safety-rules-1489444.html

finding people happy to work for more than say… 30 seconds on an assembly line would be near-impossible.

Again, something that is mostly able to be mechanised. Interesting how pretty much all the naysayers are coming up with mostly minor examples of issues that either wouldn’t exist in a resource-based economy or are relatively easy to resolve or mitigate. If this is all there is to throw at it I’m beginning to think it’s a lot easier than I first thought 🙂

Not as remarkable as what is being suggested here

Not sure on this. In WW2 pretty much the entire economy and population were mobilised to produce weapons and supplies and overcome the inability to import goods. And this happened in a couple of years, not decades.

Yes, BUT they were mobilised to do so by conscription, backed by law and forced to do the jobs they were told to do without any choice (eg Bevin Boys, land girls etc)

dazh – Member

something that is mostly able to be mechanised.

so, robots will do all the crap jobs?

is that it?

Yes, BUT they were mobilised to do so by conscription, backed by law and forced to do the jobs they were told to do without any choice

Yes but it at least shows that huge changes can be made to an economy at the macro level towards a specific aim. The politics behind how you implement it is a separate debate, and in the links in the OP the mechanism by which this would be put in place is left open. It’s only looking at the economics of whether it would be possible with existing resources and technology to have a sustainable resource based system.

Fair enough. When all this comes about, I guarantee I will post a thread on here in which I will unreservedly apologise for my scepticism. 😉

Because they want to? Because they find it fascinating, or want to give something back?

Really? How many people really want to spend 10+ years of their life understanding and maintaining big infrastructure? You know the stuff that matters, like stable electricity supply, water supplies, bridges not collapsing? Most of the time it is a long way from interesting, but it does pay okay.

At least in this new Utopia they’ll be no Apple-Android-Microsoft or Shimano-SRAM-Campag debates as we’ll all be using the same stuff. Fun 😥

I suppose you could mechanise ships but that requires some sort of technological leap from somewhere.

And yes, the economies of WW2 were born of an authoritarian system. You seem to be arguing for a libertarian system.

the politics behind how you implement it is a Seperate debate

It really isn’t, as the only way it could ever work is compulsion, which is incompatible with the entire suggestion of a system without money, barter, debt or servitude!

I’m not arguing for anything, I’m just discussing something I happened to come across whilst off work. I’m as sceptical as everyone. It sounds great, and much of it makes more sense than the current ridiculous system, but there are major problems. I don’t think these are the issues of getting people to do the jobs that are required though. I think the major problems are that it would be very difficult to provide the variety and volume of goods, services and jobs/careers required to keep people mentally stimulated with all the free time they have. I actually think that people would be queueing up to do a lot of the jobs mentioned (engineers etc) as otherwise they’d be so bored they’d go insane.

squirrelking – Member

Hey guys, looking for volunteers for the ‘Dirty Thirty’ cleanup. Anyone? Anyone?

Guys?

Is anyone there?

Thought not.

Do you not clean your own bathroom? Are you going to sit on your arse while rubbish piles up in the street?

Of course volunteers are only one way to do things. You can have public service rosters/ballots/lotteries, frexample, which are all much fairer than the current system of inexplicably paying people hardly anything to do jobs you don’t want to do yourself. The highly skilled jobs are more difficult than the crap jobs tbh.

dragon – Member

Really? How many people really want to spend 10+ years of their life understanding and maintaining big infrastructure?

If you like, I can nip down to the department and round up a whole bunch of them?

You can have public service rosters/ballots/lotteries,

No you can’t, the ethos precludes debt or servitude!

No you can’t, the ethos precludes debt or servitude!

We had a roster for the washing up in my shared house for a while – I don’t remember considering that servitude.

It really isn’t, as the only way it could ever work is compulsion, which is incompatible with the entire suggestion of a system without money, barter, debt or servitude!

You have a lack of imagination I think. Compulsion is one way of implementing it (hence my eco-fascism comments), revolution and the mass restructuring of society is another. More likely, and preferably, it’d be a mix of both, a recognition that there is a problem that needs to be solved, then a deliberate and gradual process of re-education and reform towards the goal. You could start stripping away some of the worst aspects of the market system almost immediately whilst beginning the rebuilding of infrastructure. Re-educating people would be a multi-generational process though.

Re-education?

Will there be camps where this takes place?

seriously, If the only way you can achieve your goal is through a mixture of revolution, compulsion and mandatory re-education, then I reckon you’ve answered your initial question 😆

Hah, I had a bet on with myself that you’d jump on “re-education” like that 😆

😀 had to be done

I think it’s impressive that in two and a bit pages we’ve taken Dazh from self confessed pinko liberal to outing himself as a full on Pol Pot style dystopian nightmare

You have a lack of imagination I think. Compulsion is one way of implementing it (hence my eco-fascism comments), revolution and the mass restructuring of society is another. More likely, and preferably, it’d be a mix of both, a recognition that there is a problem that needs to be solved, then a deliberate and gradual process of re-education and reform towards the goal. You could start stripping away some of the worst aspects of the market system almost immediately whilst beginning the rebuilding of infrastructure. Re-educating people would be a multi-generational process though.

Ah gotcha ……………… Aka totalitarianism

The trouble with all these sorts of ideas is that they are good at identifying what is wrong with our current society but actually putting together a viable, realistic alternative is where they come a cropper (think Marxism)

Ah gotcha ……………… Aka totalitarianism

At school I had lessons in how to hold down a job*, how to manage my finances and in how our political system works. I’m not sure dazh is proposing much more in the way of indoctrination than that.

*Not including anything about posting on STW whilst I should be doing something else.

Do you not clean your own bathroom? Are you going to sit on your arse while rubbish piles up in the street?

Of course not. But at the same time cleaning either of those isn’t a very real and credible danger to life. I have no idea how you would compel someone to take part in a cleanup that makes reactor diving look like a complete non-issue in comparison.

Don’t be daft. Like the entire news-media and education system isn’t an effort in brainwashing people to think the current system is the only viable one? Maybe I should’ve used the term ‘education’ rather than ‘re-education’, but de-programming the decades of pro-market propaganda that people can have whatever they want at no cost to future generations is going to be quite an effort. Compulsion? Maybe it would be required to get there. It wouldn’t be the first time extreme measures have been used to prevent societal destruction though would it?

And like I said, I’m not promoting anything, just musing on it when I should be doing some work…