Economic Ideology
If considering paradise in the grander scheme of life, can it exist without money?
I've pondered this topic for some time, though paradise may include exotics such as fantasy, games and beauty, whence analysed, these versions seem petty and disposable.
Introducing this topic named Economic Ideology, to discuss the potential of simulations with an economy, and whether other simulations are overly parasitical.
Imagine a simulation where you could, at the expense of some form of currency, spawn any buildings, or further, any resource and thus, have builders. You could spawn any food product, so farming animals need not result in slaughter, but a simple trip to a broker who weighs and determines the quality of your animal, thus providing you with meat. This was an example of how a simulation with an economy can be simplified or made more complex.
This example simulation I have described with infinite resources, seems very much like paradise. Alongside the economy could be the more disposable game world or fantasy land, but I argue that it is necessary to have something core like an economy for paradise to be complete- otherwise it is temporary.
There may be other configurations of a core, such as power play or productivity.
So what are your thoughts on economic Ideology?
I've pondered this topic for some time, though paradise may include exotics such as fantasy, games and beauty, whence analysed, these versions seem petty and disposable.
Introducing this topic named Economic Ideology, to discuss the potential of simulations with an economy, and whether other simulations are overly parasitical.
Imagine a simulation where you could, at the expense of some form of currency, spawn any buildings, or further, any resource and thus, have builders. You could spawn any food product, so farming animals need not result in slaughter, but a simple trip to a broker who weighs and determines the quality of your animal, thus providing you with meat. This was an example of how a simulation with an economy can be simplified or made more complex.
This example simulation I have described with infinite resources, seems very much like paradise. Alongside the economy could be the more disposable game world or fantasy land, but I argue that it is necessary to have something core like an economy for paradise to be complete- otherwise it is temporary.
There may be other configurations of a core, such as power play or productivity.
So what are your thoughts on economic Ideology?
Comments (10)
I think my economic ideology or paradise would be a system where, at least, most of the workers have the right to own a house and then invest in culture. We live in an era where money and salaries are so important for the individuals so imagine if you do not have s good salary or it is low. I guess economic or money are not connected with richness but somehow most of the people committed this failure.
For these reasons I would say that my thoughts on economical ideology would go in the power of sustainability not only in products as you explained but in individual development.
Sure.
The economy will be just different. Barter isn't the only option, if you have other things that replace the role of money and give the information and feedback, then I guess it would be OK. And those roles are medium of exchange, unit of account, store of value and perhaps standard of payment.
I think that there might be a few leftist leaning forum members here who have thought about the idea (or read about it) more. Yet to think that the problems like wealth inequality wouldn't go away if you are thinking about that.
There would be no economy.
I was confused by this remark. In the US doesn't everyone have the right to own a house? Can you give an example of anyone who lacks the right to own a house?
So maybe society can live without money if everyone was born 40 years old and already was in an earning career, but as far as kids go, they dont have the social responsibility for it, exempla gratia.
lol. Yes.
I am not American. I am from Spain... we don’t have the same rules and the same economical opportunities
Could this have been a language issue? Everyone in the US has the right to own a house, but many lack the money. Is that what you meant? That everyone should have the means in addition to the right?
If so, should everyone also have the right, and the means, to own a Lamborghini? Or in your ideal world will everyone have a house, but the poor will have to drive Toyotas? And will some people have better houses than others? What problems would be solved by everyone owning a house, obligated to maintain and repair it and pay property taxes?
Want I meant is that in my ideal world we should have basic salaries to at least buying a house because most of the times this is the average investment all the people do. Having a car is accessory. I know that everyone has the right but not the money to do so. This is what I want to propose. At least have a basic earning where the people (most important the youngest) can a afford a normal house not living with their parents until they are 30 or even older.
The discussion is, is ~something core- like an economy- necessary for paradise, otherwise life feels temporary. The term 'overly parasitical' which links to your response, also sounds a lot like this core-less paradise where we have anything we want (given to us I presume) without us actually going to get it. It also voids mature aspects such as business, power and producing which are paradisical to some.