Zeitgeist: Moving Forward Page #16

Economists today are finally

acknowledging what they had been denying for years:

not only is technological unemployment exasperating the current

labor crisis we see across the

world due to the global economic downturn

but the more the recession deepens

the faster the industries are mechanizing.

The catch, which is not realized

is that the faster they mechanize to save money;

the more they displace people -

the more they reduce public purchasing power.

This means that, while the corporation

can produce everything more cheaply

fewer and fewer people will actually have money to buy anything

regardless of how cheap they become.

The bottom line is that the labor for

income game is slowly coming to an end.

In fact, if you take a moment to reflect

on the jobs which are in existence today

which automation could take over right now, if applied

75% of the global workforce could be

replaced by mechanization tomorrow.

And this is why, in a Resource-Based Economy

There is no Monetary-Market system.

No money at all...

for there is no need.

a Resource-Based Economy

recognizes the efficiency of mechanization

and accepts it for what it offers.

It doesn't fight it, like we do today.

Why? Because it is irresponsible not to

given any interest in efficiency and sustainability.

And this brings us back to our city system.

In the center is the Central Dome

which not only houses the

educational facilities and transportation hub -

it also hosts the mainframe that

runs the cities technical operations.

The city is, in fact, one big automated machine.

It has sensors in all technical belts

to track the progress of architecture -

energy gathering, production, distribution and the like.

Now, would people be needed to oversee these

operations in the event of a malfunction and the like?

Most probably:
yes.

But that number would decrease

over time as improvements continue.

However, as of today, maybe 3% of

the city population would be needed

for this job when you break it down.

And I can assure you:

that in an economic system which is

actually designed to take care of you

and secure your well being

without you having to submit to

private dictatorship on a daily basis...

usually to a job that is either

technically unnecessary or socially pointless

while often struggling with debt that doesn't exist

just to make ends meet...

I guarantee you:
people will volunteer their time left and right

to maintain and improve a system

that actually takes care of them.

And coupled with this issue of 'Incentive' -

comes the common assumption that

if there isn't some external pressure

for "one to work for a living"

people would just sit around, do nothing

and turn into fat lazy blobs.

This is nonsense.

The labor system we have today is

in fact the generator of laziness -

not a resolver of it.

If you think back to when you were a child -

full of life, interested in new things to understand -

likely creating and exploring...

but as time went on, the system pushed you

into the focus of figuring out how to make money.

And from early education

to study at a university, you are narrowed.

Only to emerge as a creature which serves

as a cog in a wheel in a model that

sends all the fruits to the upper 1%.

Scientific Studies have now shown that people are, in fact

not motivated by monetary reward

when it comes to ingenuity and creation.

The creation itself is the reward.

Money, in fact, appears only to serve as an incentive

for repetitive, mundane actions -

a role we have just now shown can be replaced by machine.

When it comes to innovation

the actual use of the human mind

the monetary incentive has proven to be a hindrance

interfering and detracting from creative thought.

And this might explain why Nikola Tesla, the Wright Brothers

and other inventors who contributed massively

to our current world

never showed a monetary incentive to do so.

Money is, in fact, a false incentive

and causes 100 times more distortion

than it does contribution.

Good morning class. Please settle down.

The first thing I would like to do is go around the room

and ask what everyone would like to be when they grow up.

Who would like to go first?

Okay, how about you Sarah?

When I grow up I want to work at McDonald's like my mom!

Oh, family tradition, eh?

How about you, Linda?

When I grow up, I'm going to be a

prostitute on the streets of New York City!

Oh! glamour girl, huh?

Very ambitious.

How about you, Tommy?

When I grow up, I'm going to be a

rich, elitist businessman who works

on Wall Street and profits off of

the collapse of foreign economies.

Enterprising...

And great to see some multicultural interest!

[Victims of Culture]

As stated before, a Resource-Based

Economy applies the Scientific Method to social concern

and this isn't limited to simply technical efficiency.

It also has the consideration of

human and social well-being directly and what comprises it.

What good is a social system if, in the end

it doesn't produce happiness and peaceful coexistence?

So, it is important to point out that

with the removal of the money system

and the necessities of life provided

we would see a global reduction in

crime by about 95% almost immediately

for there is nothing to steal, embezzle, scam, or the like.

95% of all people in prisons today are there

due to some monetary related crime or drug abuse

and drug abuse is a disorder - not a crime.

So what about the other 5%?

the truly violent...

often seeming to some as being

violent for the sake of being violent...

are they just "evil" people?

The reason that I frankly think it's a waste of time

to engage in moral value judgments

about people's violence is

because it doesn't advance by one iota

our understanding of either the causes

or the prevention of the violent behavior.

People sometimes ask if I believe in "forgiving" criminals.

My answer to that is

No, I don't believe in forgiveness

anymore than I believe in condemnation.

It's only if we, as a society

can take the same attitude of treating violence as

a problem in public health and preventive medicine

rather than as a moral "evil"...

it's only when we make that change in our

own attitudes and assumptions and values

that we will actually succeed in reducing the

level of violence rather than stimulating it -

which is what we do now.

The more justice you seek, the more hurt you become

because there's no such thing as justice.

There is whatever there is out there. That's it.

In other words, if people are conditioned to be racist bigots -

if they are brought up in an environment that advocates that

why do you blame the person for it?

They are a victim of a subculture.

Therefore they have to be helped.

The point is, we have to redesign the environment

that produces aberrant behavior.

That's the problem.

Not putting a person in jail.

That's why judges - lawyers -

"freedom of choice" - such concepts

Rate this script:0.0 / 0 votes