I operate this way for the most part, and I'm sure much of Slashdot does to varying degrees. But slashdot is tiny in the grand scheme of things. I'm curious though, what would happen to a national economy if most people did this? Less consumer spending means we're down several thousand companies and even more jobs, which also means less tax revenue. Since we also have more unemployed, it also means an increased spending on social welfare programs. I'm not a fan of keeping shitty companies around, but assuming less consumer spending plays out like that, shitty companies (and the spending on them) are the less of two evils. In a capitalist economy anyway.....
I'm not sure what a different kind of economy would look like. Maybe it would be enough to do away with stock markets and traditional corporate ownership. Co-op's only, every organization is owned by those who work for it. That way there's no worrying about if an economy is doing well or not, we just have self sustaining businesses and those that aren't. No one really tracks economic performance other than how many co-ops a country has and how much they make. There's just no such thing as poor economic performance since this system doesn't have anything rely on growth. Want to start a co-op? Find others who will work with you, take out a (I suppose banks would have to be made co-ops as well - though without business stocks/ dividends to profit from, would there really be a point in central money repositories other than the government issuing currency?) loan, and get to work.
67 posts and no one has mentioned TOR yet? Everyone above has geek credentials suspended for a week.
On top of doing this, I suggest creating a TOR site mirroring all this material. The USB sticks can include the Tor Browser Bundle for all platforms and a txt file (or better yet, bookmarks) with the urls. Maybe also a note saying "Be patient, anonymous browsing is *slower*"
Newsblur has a limit of 64 sites for a free account
Also when they say site updates 1x, I assume once a day. What's the point of RSS?
All we ever wanted was a cross platform reader that would sync and organize your feeds.
And a new software was born. We shall call it, CPRSO.
Don't give up just because it is hard and hasn't been done right in the past! If people did this, our society would still involve flinging shit at whoever is in the next tree. I bet the concept of a city was just an ideal that failed many many many times until the right conditions let it succeed.
You're right that it was abused, but I would argue that no country has ever implemented communism as Marx talked about it. IE it has never been tried.
Further, there is nothing about Marx's communism that necessarily requires keeping people in the dark in an authoritarian system. IIRC, he called for 'workers to own the means of production.' Kinda hard to be kept in the dark, when you own the damn the thing. It's also not authoritarian when you are the boss, albeit with others.
Now it has been a while since I read both works, but I don't recall anything that would conflict with open/transparent government and democracy. He did want a centrally planned economy, I guess it would have to be authoritarian in the sense that some group makes decisions on what happens; in his time period, I suppose you couldn't query the masses. I think it would be very interesting to see communism implemented again, ie a centrally planned economy, but instead of a small group/department of planners, poll the citizens?
And heck, if we still want to allow entrepreneurship, just make a law that says 51% of shares of any company are divided amongst all employees.
how is that any different?
people want organs and can not wait.. people want to have sex with partners who do not consent with no repercussions. people want to get high.
they are the same, just because people want something that is illegal and you happen to think said choice should be legal does not make them different things.
That's a good point, however drugs are very different in one way, no one has to get hurt. The OP didn't make this point but it holds true for the discussion.
Also legal drug production also means safer drug usage. However I suppose you can argue that this point applies to organs and sex trading as well. If it's going to happen anyway, why not legalize and regulate it so we can make sure it's as safe as possible? If you don't like what's going on, let's spend part of the tax revenue on educating about the problems associated with the behaviour. Eventually it can become taboo. Smoking is legal, but it has become socially unacceptable.
Oh but these aren't Android phones &_&