12-20-2013, 03:52 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-20-2013, 04:16 AM by Adonai One.)
(12-19-2013, 06:33 PM)rie Wrote:(12-19-2013, 07:25 AM)Bang Kaew Wrote: People say capitalism is selfish but ironically capitalism is the only system that works when the majority are selfish! A STO society would be a money free co-operative imo.
Had these conversations with healer friends around money and they conceptualize it as energy exchange of sorts, that without some sort of exchange there would be imbalances created. Altho don't need money necessarily… other forms of exchanges may take its place.
Exchanges won't be needed if services weren't conditional, and imbalance and unfairness were not perceived. If people didn't sacrifice themselves in a martyristic fashion and respected themselves, this would limit any possible "parasitism" as well. It will prevent the idea of anybody owing anything to another person. When debts, usury and obligation are used in society, things slowly degenerate into slavery.
A sign of a failing relationship is when the partners involved count what they do for each other and put debts over each others heads while having conditional demands and expectations of each other. Today's society reminds me of such a relationship.
True love is without expectation, obligation and conditions. Money and formal exchange is a form of strict, conditional love with a very thick wall of separation.
(12-19-2013, 07:37 PM)Poet Wrote: ...Property as a concept fades away when people respect each other's personal boundaries and scarcity of resources is no longer a factor. I believe property easily becomes an infringement on others when certain governments and organizations declare monopolies on nature, knowledge and methods of travel. Property is naturally a way of excluding others and it can become imbalanced as a concept to where people are controlling each other in a usuristic fashion. In a loving society, property goes as far as not dominating over people's personal space.
2) Homesteading (If a human being mixes his labour with a piece of land which was unowned before, he owns this land).
Any thoughts? One could argue that it is a distortion of the Law of Free Will...