Barter Really Isn't The Answer

[royster]

The other night I recieved a phone call just past midnight: it was Janice, needing me to take her to the emergency room.

Thinking ahead, I took my notebook for the wait I was assured. I started jotting down notes about a topic that was slowly rising within my mind:

Barter really isn't the answer.

Barter is still a "value-system" exchange. I periodically wrote down notes, as thoughts came to me. It was a Sunday night/morning, and the waiting room was empty. It was a perfect place...under the circumstances...to think this through.

So I will post my notes and let members hash this out. I intend to write about it, but right now...I have to leave on a job trip. The notes are in the order i wrote them down.
______________________________
Still a value-exchange with all the value-exchange problems.

.Cooperative existing-with self, "God" and community~ a common thread throughout every society, every tribe all around the world > universe.

.Simple set of tenets to maintain harmony (like 12 steps)

.Not by hoarding, but by sharing

.Not by controlling but by trusting unconditionally
-how do we achieve unconditional trust?
.trust ourselves by being honest

.Law Of Abundance-attracting corrective energies, perceived as attacks
.Willingness to address our own ingrained contitioning

7 years of weeding (before garden soil is weed-free)

.at every turn, a rebuttal-unwillingness to let go of false comfort...confort derived from a value-system.

."How would we eat?" - how long of a chance have you given 'God' to show Itself to you? Not any significant amount of time...because you had to get back to work.

The stronger the belief system, the weaker the faith.

Comfort does not challenge spiritual ideals (Christed in a Lazy Boy watching football)

.Longevity of housing is based on profit, not endurance for humanity.

.Are games instilling the change we need, or reinforcing same-old behavior? It can't be both.

SO-does entertainment promote the necessary changes society needs


or reinforcing the 'comfortable'?
_____________________________________
Two hours later Janice emerged and I took her home. She's fine. The topic is BARTER. Some think it a viable alternative to the money system. I perceive it is still a value-exchange.

Have at it!

[HiImJeremy]

G'day Roy! Long time no see.

I was wondering what your thoughts are on 'energy exchange'

Back in the times when Shamans were common people to go to for healing and guidance, the villagers would bring something with them or do something for the Shaman for the shamans expertise. Maybe bring them some corn or a pair of moccasins or a tepee. Something that can be put to good use and is helpful for survival. Do you agree with this? is there a better way?

[royster]

Interesting to mention shamans, because there I was, in a hospital, reading signs about "the ambulance service is an independent contractor not affiliated with the hospital"...everyone is there demanding money for their services. While they may have some degree of care for people, the primary motivator is money, not healing people. (I expect a lot of flak for that). The the argument will come about how money is necessary for this and that, and it avoids the point:

Many are willing to barter, and that's a good start. But how would we manage to change into a world where we do what we do because we care about the community and give of ourselves without expectation of some value in exchange? Would I? Yes: I already practice this to a large degree. Steve Pavlina's putting his work in the public domain is a step in this direction. (Have I donated? Not yet, but I intend to, and more than the suggested $11). I know first hand if you give of yourself without expectation of return, people tend to be very generous. These are the baby steps toward living the Law Of Abundance. It approaches the universal sharing of energy.

We are witnessing the exploitation of the planet's resources for profit...both the profit and the resources are wasted on temporary social structure, because our labors are not toward things that endure, but replacing things designed to wear out. This isn't suggesting the topic become Communism or Socialism, both of which are still value-exchanges.

The planet, our bodies, and the universe were given to us without charge. There is a "law" that shepherds this. Money systems collapse, but plants keep growing...what's their motivation?

[royster]

An excellent post on another thread presents a large part of the problem:
the GIFFORDS shooting

MariconesUnited:

The men and women who not only profit from the political racket, but whose identities are so entwined with the state as to be unable to imagine a life without an attachment to coercive power, are unlikely to make any intelligent changes in their lives. A few might begin to figure out that the "public" – for whom they like to pretend they serve – has a growing resentment of them. For the politically minded, the expression of such anger is seen not as a warning that the state has reached too far, but as another "problem" to be dealt with by a further extension of state power.

[Andrew Gubb]

money is just barter with a convient resource for bartering with. inflation is a problem because money isn't real and the governments/banks create money to make themselves rich. but apart from that it's no different than bartering with grains of gold. why not?

sharing is the best economy though i'd like to point out that sharing and trade can coexist. i think the best revolution would be to remove the focus from trade and move it over to sharing for the most part. when trade happens, it's not from a place of fear, rather from a place of mutual responsability.

[MariconesUnited]

I think we need to keep in touch Royster. I was just reading this thread when I saw you quoting me quoting that guy in that other thread who quoted that article you were quoting! (whew!)

In regards to the topic at hand: No, barter is certainly NOT the answer! Money came about from the barter system itself. All of these systems come from the underlying belief that others are not to be trusted and that is the belief that needs to be investigated! I've found answers in the works of Eckhart Tolle and the philosophical teachings of the Buddha among others.

Now, on a Global level, we need to accept the fact that we live in a system that believes in scarcity. The smartest, most conniving, manipulative, controlling people usually find themselves at the "top" of our accepted social statuses. Power and money usually comes to those with very strong egos. People who derive their sense of identity with the amount of "things" they acquire and the sense of "power" that comes with it usually become very good at acquiring these things. And unfortunately that mindset is extremely widespread. Meaning those who "have" less are generally less happy. True happiness is unrelated to the circumstances perceived by the brain in the present moment. That is what Enlightenment is about.

I too, believe in giving for the sake of giving. Only then can one know true abundance. But let's face it, most of modern society has little to no experience in this area and so it has little understanding of it. How do we go about deconstructing the ego's fabrications when a very large majority of us doesn't even recognize or understand the ego? When I speak of the ego's fabrications I'm speaking, among many things, of money, the state, corporations, armies and many other institutions that only serve to bind us and restrict our freedoms.

On a personal level, I believe in mutual respect. Sadly, that makes me unemployable in many, many jobs. And how can I continue spreading revolutionary ideas without making money, which most of the world accepts as the only form of valid exchange for goods and services? The reason I ask is because I believe in genuine sharing, for the sake of sharing. I'm thinking of starting up a website or 3 hehe. I just wonder how I would live with the paradox of making money through these sites while advocating for the end of the monetary system.

Food for thought.

[royster]

I can't rep you again today, but I offer a personal applause; well spoken, insightful, and what the topic is really about.

p.s.
I started just such a website. Check your PMs

[Andrew Gubb]

Originally Posted by MariconesUnited

On a personal level, I believe in mutual respect. Sadly, that makes me unemployable in many, many jobs.

Haha, same here. I decided long ago not to get into an employer/employee dynamic. So I made my own money making activities and ditched the intermediary.

Originally Posted by MariconesUnited

I'm thinking of starting up a website or 3 hehe. I just wonder how I would live with the paradox of making money through these sites while advocating for the end of the monetary system.

I think the best path is balance (or balanced revolution). There's nothing wrong with making money; its vibration depends on how you do it. You can do it with ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ marketing, a sense of ownership, and a sense of only caring about yourself -- or you can do it with transparency, a sense of giving, and a sense of mutual respect and kindness.

For me trade happens when I want to give something but don't have infinite capacity to give it. Asking for money is about mutual responsibility, not ownership.

Learning to handle money is about getting connected with responsibility, responsibility for making things work together.

I believe that no-one needs my help, so I don't mind excluding some people with my prices. On the other hand, when I have a larger capacity to give than some people might have to give in return, I will help them happily. Mutual responsibility goes both ways; I need to recieve to be able to give, even if giving is more interesting to me than recieving.

[royster]

Spot-on, Andrew!

[royster]

The present money system is also the basis for 95% of pollution and waste in the world. In the competition to sell crap to people...crap they don't need...plastics are used which end up in land fills. Trees are destroyed for excessive packaging. Resources are squandered...like television...for support of the system, rather than the meaningful education it could be providing. The world's #1 polluter? The Pentagon, bar none; not only for weapons-development, but the distribution of depleted uranium globally. The American "defense INDUSTRY" depends on conflict to remain in 'business'. Therefore an honest society cannot emerge as long as such obstacles remain firmly supported by the threat of loss, discomfort, or...when all else fails...fear.

Here is one person's take on how barter, in theory, works:

I paint your house for you, you chop fire wood for me.

I work for you weeding the carrot patch, you give me a bag of apples, and 2 loafs of french bread. (home made)

But this misses a crucial point: we need to attend to our own personal obligations. The garden is ours' to weed. The interaction with our own space is crucial for self-understanding. Relegating chores to someone else is no different than hiring cheap immigrant labor to attend tasks we don't want to do.

I litterally 'weed my own garden, paint my own house, and chop my own fire wood'. In a tribal mentality, of course we perform these tasks as an act of love for the elderly and the handicapped.

So the above-mentioned concept of 'barter' is just a value-system-exchange, and does not eliminate the problems; it fosters them.

[Mud]

To go a little further into what you are talking about Roy, it also brings in an element of superiority.

That task is beneath me so I will hire you to do it. For some reason when money changes hands the person passing that money on seems to have a superior air to the one receiving the money.

It is all an illusion however since the giver is also a receiver somewhere down the line.

I agree with the example you posted above. When the task is something you should be doing for yourself, it seems counterproductive to barter for it.

In an ideal world to me each would do their own menial tasks but would use their gifts to share with others. While one may be a better builder, another is a better weaver. To me, barter is more- I will do something for you that you cannot do for yourself, expecting nothing in return and you seeing my need give something I cannot get myself out of your own sense of sharing or gratitude.

In that way, the websites mentioned above kind of work. For instance, Steve gives his information free of charge in hopes of making people even better than he is, and in turn many getting value from it give donations in gratitude.

I don't know, it is a complicated subject because we all have needs that we cannot fill alone.

[royster]

Excellent and right-on comments, Mud. This is coming up on the other two forums this topic is running on.
Barter Really Isn't The Answer

I'm really pleased with your imputs, people!

[royster]

"I hail to you from a mountain valley in southeastern British Columbia - the western-most province in Canada. Southern Canada, within 80 minutes by road from the U.S. border above Washington state. We have an alternative community in this area, mixed in with a 'conventional' rural & small-towns community. I want to write to you about barter and sharing and work and providing, etc. But I'll first give an intro about our alternative community.

Okay... well, it's a community made up of people ranging in age from infancy to age 75 or so. People into whole foods, outdoor recreation, music, dancing, nude swimming, social experimentation, massage, sexy entertainment (some folks), organic gardening (some folks), total escapism (some folks), interesting visions and concepts (some folks), yoga (mainly the physical aspect... some folks into consciousness processes), revelatory information, smoking weed and eating mushrooms (some folks), on-line social networking (some folks), black markets (some folks), wildlife (bears, elk, fish, etc) protection (some folks), and suchlike. Does that make a picture in your mind? ...

Sharing sometimes happens spontaneously amongst people who don't really know each other, but much more often amongst circles of friends. Personally, I've done sharing, barter, for-hire, and other sorts of exchanges.

Due to the unmistakable limitations of exchanges amongst friends and acquaintances, we've had some experiments here with LETSystems and with alternative currencies. Of course, it's more services (skilled labor) that people have tended to exchange, with "goods" being exchanged to a lesser degree and in a limited range. Value-based systems: the alternative exchange systems have been seen as theoretically more flexible and potentially far-reaching than one-to-one barter exchanges.

However, the three attempts (that I know of) with alternative currency or credit systems have eventually fizzled out because of factors like: 1) couldn't pay for my rent, my mortgage, or my needed pick-up truck purchase with the local money; 2) certain essential-skilled tradespeople (like mechanics) wound up with more local-money than other participants, and not enough places to spend it, and many participants wound up with too little local-money. This shows up within six months or a year or two.

About 10-12 years ago, a large portion of the alternative community (maybe 40%) got involved - in a large way or small way - with growing cannabis for the N. American black market. I did not, but a lot of people did. This "seems" to many people to have solved the problems (seems possibly being the operative word): "Growers" as they are called have been able to buy houses and land, buy vehicles, buy stereos and big-screen TVs, travel during the bleak winter months, afford organic food, membership in a fitness center, yoga instruction, even afford to feed their dogs the best-quality food!

Personally, I support the theory of sharing and also of flexible alternative-exchange systems. Yet my experience to date has been frustrating and disappointing. I still help my neighbors when they ask. I offer my assistance sometimes even if not asked. Mostly, though, now I try to be self-responsible and work on my consciousness ("ascension) to keep my vibes high.

So I'm being honest in what I write here. On the experiential or practical (read: community) levels, I probably have more questions than answers."

-----------------------
The crux of the problem has been really nicely outlined, and your experience is very valuable, not just to the topic, but humanity at a difficult pivotal-point in our evolution.

The "haves" and "have-nots" can, indeed, continue under a barter system.

It is through the ascension process I am learning about how the greater universe works. Many might be discouraged when they look around and see the seemingly-invincible money system bulldozing over lives, and even your own story points out the flaws. The answer is to adhere to those suggestions from the greater universe..."the God of YOUR understanding"...and try, a day at a time...to live those convictions, regardless of media mouth-pieces and nay-sayers.

This very site is about sharing openly and freely, NOT "keeping score", and trying new ideas. The irony might be in the hidden boards and 'karma' system, but I'm a Gemini .

It all reminds me of biblical Egypt, and Moses leading the people out. The Powers That Be chaced them, because they didn't want to lose obligated, cheap slave labor.

[st33med]

Originally Posted by royster

Interesting to mention shamans, because there I was, in a hospital, reading signs about "the ambulance service is an independent contractor not affiliated with the hospital"...everyone is there demanding money for their services. While they may have some degree of care for people, the primary motivator is money, not healing people. (I expect a lot of flak for that). The the argument will come about how money is necessary for this and that, and it avoids the point:

So do you believe that contractors who hire and train drivers and buy the ambulances with their own money are not supposed to get their money back and be instead thankful that they are only going to save lives? It's not going to help much once the ambulance service goes bankrupt and they don't have money to buy gas or buy more ambulances.

Not to mention with no or negative net profit, the other companies that the ambulance contractors use to buy into will also go bankrupt.

[royster]

I have to assume you don't grasp the idea of the topic, and that you have not taken to heart the depth and comprehension of those who have contributed reasonable views. If one is so steeped in the monetary system that they are unable to imagine another way of living, then they could only be defending the system and its attendant control of the population.

Abulances are used for the results of stupid activity 95% of the time. Car accidents are usually encountered while shopping, going to work (so one CAN shop) and increasingly by using cell phones whose signals kill honey bees. While some may not care about honey bees, they are part of a very fragile ecosystem that...coincidentally...a money system depends on. Crop pollenization, for example. Those adhering to a money-system tend to disregard the casualties OF that money system, namely Nature. And cell-phone users tend to disregard the traffic around them while driving.

Sure: we need abulances. The change we are referring to in this topic includes illiminating lifestyle focuses that are killing the planet and humanity. We have become a society that values profit over life. A rather fickle quandary, don't you agree? At what point...and how...do we turn things around?

This video might inspire some to keep searching for alternatives and deeper being. YouTube - We are who we've been waiting for...

[secrets0stolen]

Those who control the food, pretty much control everybody...when people can get their own food, why would they not be free? (yes, I swear this is related)

In that circumstance there are only one way someone could seize control: violence. Demonstration, then continued threat. However, if people weren't happy about that, why wouldn't they stop one man right from the start.
If people were happy about that, then he wouldn't be using violence, would he? He'd be followed voluntarily.

Now, what happens if people can obtain all their needs in the area in which they live? No trade, or more precisely, no necessary trade. If the "production" of those needs is decentralized enough, there's really no trade within the community either.

Now what about the unnecessary trade? What if one community wants the beautiful jewelry of another? I don't see how barter would be an inappropriate. Maybe community B makes really good musical instruments. And if community A doesn't want to hand over there jewelry for anything, it's not like anyone would want to go to war over that. However when your food depends on trade....

Let's call community A the city, and community B the country. If the city's people are gonna die if the country people won't give them there food, there will be force involved. You can't have a trade system that depends on trading necessary items for unnecessary ones. That's where your trouble comes in, gold is just as unnecessary as money, and money's only a further abstraction. Furthermore, both those things can be hoarded, creating social stratification. Although, before those things are even in existence, social stratification is usually created by grain hoarding.

[st33med]

One thing I would like to point out is how is money unnecessary? It helps us trade for a common value for everyone and sets a solid price for what the manufacturer would expect.

[royster]

This posting from another forum:
"I'm happy that you received my post in such a welcoming way, royster. Still, my post was mainly an expression of exasperation. The money systems of the world obviously don't work out in favor of people in general, and certainly (as far as I can tell) do not reward the most compassionate, empathetic, and noble amongst humanity. But work out? - the alternative (local credit or local currency) systems that have been attempted in my region, at least, have not yet worked out. And generous, small-C-christian sharing may be valuable and deeply touching when it occurs, but it does not happen in (or apply to) enough different situations to constitute any kind of sufficient economic system.

Situation: You need lumber. Okay?... well maybe you've got some trees that can be selectively cut without overtaxing the forest ecosystem. Then some people have to spend their time felling the trees, limbing them and cutting the logs to length, transporting them to a mill, milling the lumber; then the lumber must be carefully dried in a shelter, and someone has to either transport the lumber to the site where it's needed or the end-user has to bring her/his vehicle to the drying shed and pick up the lumber. What's involved besides immediate human labor? Well, chainsaws, trucks, gasoline (& maybe diesel fuel), a sawmill, a drying shed, and a lumber-transport vehicle - and all these things must be manufactured from raw materials and purchased.

Labor, information, materials.

Economics is the formal term for how people, as groups or societies, acquire what they need to live and be comfortable.

Maybe we can sense some ideal of mutual support and exchange that calls to our higher nature... but can we actualize it as such? If you say "yes" then please point to some examples."

royster:
Pioneers. How did they manage? How did they share? What was their motivation? MUTUAL SURVIVAL.

Ever heard of a 'barn raising'?

Do you think a CEO is respected among Native Indians?

What do you suppose Eve paid, per pound, for apples in the garden?

If we trust enough in our inner-soul, if we listen to Nature and the spiritual stream, you might find the answers are not so impossible. You might also find this is the direction we haven't tried, and the last one available.

But it requires some sacrifice; something commercials insist you need not do.

I don't know about you, but when I face my Maker, none of those commercials will excuse me from making choices that benefited me only.

[royster]

It stuns me that people call themselves "Christian", yet adhere to only the teachings that benefit their comfort.

"Ask not 'wherefore shall we eat? How shall we be clothed?'" etc. If you have no real faith in Jesus' teachings, or are unwilling to live them, who might your Master be? If you haven't studied them, is it just a costume you put on, this "Christianity"?

[secrets0stolen]

Originally Posted by st33med

One thing I would like to point out is how is money unnecessary? It helps us trade for a common value for everyone and sets a solid price for what the manufacturer would expect.

Well, you just listed some of it's functions..which I don't think anyone's arguing with. However, those functions are unnecessary. We can argue about whether the net effect is good or not, but it's not necessary in the strict sense of the word.

[st33med]

Originally Posted by secrets0stolen

Well, you just listed some of it's functions..which I don't think anyone's arguing with. However, those functions are unnecessary. We can argue about whether the net effect is good or not, but it's not necessary in the strict sense of the word.

Well, it certainly isn't a necessity that it keeps us alive. But, it is extremely conventional. For example, before common national currencies were established, the market would either a) sell with uncommon metals like silver, gold, and copper, or b) trade for materials. For example, if a person would like to sell a Porsche for two donkeys, I don't believe many people would be able to get the Porsche, and the seller of the Porsche won't get his two donkeys.

However, if he sold the Porsche for, say, $20k, he could easily go to a farm selling donkeys and buy two donkeys with the money he earned and afford to care for them. It's much more conventional.

Money isn't inherently good or bad -- it's how the consumer uses it.

[royster]

it's how the consumer uses it.

When did the human form become demoted to "consumer"? Who told you we're "consumers", and why do you believe it without question? Were you to do some serious research, you could pin-point a fairly accurate date that this occurred. It's doubtful you'll take the time.

Your views are coming from the pampered throne of privelage. That privelage is contingent on the very money system you're defending. It's the same system that stole Native American land from under them. "Forced Mortgage" I think is the term. Understand that the average American statistically lives three paychecks away from homelessness. It only requires a fake stock-market crash to wipe out everything in a person's life.

Your privelaged view is what you chose in this life, I respect that. I respect that every human has chosen their life-experience. You went from living in your parents home, straight to college. Cool. I chose to get out of high school and never pursue further formal education, and my spelling probably shows it. When I was 19, I hitchhiked across the United States with a dollar in my pocket. I came as close to freezing to death in Georgia as a person can get, and still live to tell about it. I got picked up by some Hopi Indians who took me to their reservation. It was very appropriate for my Vision Quest.

Now at 53 I'm a high-end carpenter in respectable demand. School would have never taught me what I know; experience did. I give of myself every day in a spectrum of human existance. It would amaze you how many doors that opens, when your intention is for the betterment of all.

Sharing freely facilitates this.

[secrets0stolen]

Originally Posted by st33med

Well, it certainly isn't a necessity that it keeps us alive. But, it is extremely conventional. For example, before common national currencies were established, the market would either a) sell with uncommon metals like silver, gold, and copper, or b) trade for materials. For example, if a person would like to sell a Porsche for two donkeys, I don't believe many people would be able to get the Porsche, and the seller of the Porsche won't get his two donkeys.

However, if he sold the Porsche for, say, $20k, he could easily go to a farm selling donkeys and buy two donkeys with the money he earned and afford to care for them. It's much more conventional.

Totally, it makes a system like the one we have much easier. No arguing with that.

Money isn't inherently good or bad -- it's how the consumer uses it.

Nothing exists in a vacuum.

[secrets0stolen]

To expand....

Originally Posted by secrets0stolen

Totally, it makes a system like the one we have much easier. No arguing with that.

The question is whether that's a good thing.

Nothing exists in a vacuum.

Even in the most crude sense of this, money--or anything else--does not have neutral moral value. It's an object..it comes from something. Trees and ink and linen went into it's production, work went into all of that. A thousand other things went into all of that.

Either a forest came down, or a tree farm on 50 year rotation. Something made that ink, and some of it's probably toxic or petroleum based. The linen came from a pesticide ridden mono crop flax farm. Who knows how the workers were treated...probably depends on a combination of where they're from and where they are.

[secrets0stolen]

Originally Posted by MariconesUnited

Money came about from the barter system itself.

I was thinking about this, and what came to mind was: money came from a barter system. Or maybe it came from the barter system, with system being the operative word, as opposed to spontaneous barter. I mean, in many cultures a "barter" was called an exchange of gifts--non-essential items desired by the other. Like you said, food for thought.

Now, on a Global level, we need to accept the fact that we live in a system that believes in scarcity. The smartest, most conniving, manipulative, controlling people usually find themselves at the "top" of our accepted social statuses. Power and money usually comes to those with very strong egos. People who derive their sense of identity with the amount of "things" they acquire and the sense of "power" that comes with it usually become very good at acquiring these things.

Our system is designed so sociopaths--those willing to stomp others in the dust for their own ends--get to the top, and expand sociopathic ends.

On a personal level, I believe in mutual respect. Sadly, that makes me unemployable in many, many jobs. And how can I continue spreading revolutionary ideas without making money, which most of the world accepts as the only form of valid exchange for goods and services?

I know how you feel. I've taken up selective dumpster diving recently, and eating invasive plants lol. Kudzu root tastes like potatoes XD

The reason I ask is because I believe in genuine sharing, for the sake of sharing. I'm thinking of starting up a website or 3 hehe. I just wonder how I would live with the paradox of making money through these sites while advocating for the end of the monetary system.

It's not our fault we live in a system we were born into. We need money to survive to the extent that we do. Birds whose habitats have been destroyed aren't hypocrites for nesting in the barn that took the forest's place, and eating the grain out of the farmer's field.

[st33med]

Originally Posted by secrets0stolen

To expand....

The question is whether that's a good thing.


Even in the most crude sense of this, money--or anything else--does not have neutral moral value. It's an object..it comes from something. Trees and ink and linen went into it's production, work went into all of that. A thousand other things went into all of that.

Either a forest came down, or a tree farm on 50 year rotation. Something made that ink, and some of it's probably toxic or petroleum based. The linen came from a pesticide ridden mono crop flax farm. Who knows how the workers were treated...probably depends on a combination of where they're from and where they are.

Do you have another suggestion for a set of currency? Or do you even know where the dollar bills materials come from or even what type of ink is used?

Money is neutral from an objective viewpoint. It's only the value we give. For me, it's freedom.

[secrets0stolen]

Originally Posted by st33med

Do you have another suggestion for a set of currency? Or do you even know where the dollar bills materials come from or even what type of ink is used?

I don't have another suggestion (at least from the way you framed this question) and yes I do know. I've researched it.

Money is neutral from an objective viewpoint.

What objective viewpoint? The one where everything's neutral? Is that why it's supposedly objective?

It's only the value we give. For me, it's freedom.

Wouldn't you be a lot more free if you didn't need money? Either you have money by birth, and therefore are of a small percentage of people who are free, or you have to work for that money, and are during that time not free.

[royster]

.at every turn, a rebuttal:-unwillingness to let go of false comfort...comfort derived from a value-system.

And the topic is regarding something beyond barter, not about the virtues of the receiving-side of money.

Thank you, secretstolen, for the wonderful input. I hope the insightful people come back. Soon. Because their input (and yours) were getting somewhere.

While any view is certainly welcome in a topic, there is a huge difference between participating in a topic, and adamantly defending ones' belief system. Particularly a belief system that operates from very few facts.

It's like sitting in a warm Italian restaurant with a huge plate of spaghetti in front of you; between big mouthfuls you talk about how you're being just like Gandhi because you can quote one of his...you know...lines...those sayings he did. And then you neglect to tip the waiter because the service isn't up to your standards.


And you have a track record of this, st33med:

Coming To Fruitation

First post, I explain:

Originally Posted by royster

I STILL mangle words at times.

I remember being corrected on the word "fruition". I said, "I'm just waiting for this to come to fruitation." She laughed a gentle laugh and said "fruITION."

What happens on the 4th post?

Originally Posted by st33med

Don't you mean Fruition?

Originally Posted by LostMyMap

Did someone not get the joke???

Did someone read selectively and miss the point?

[Merrick1]

Originally Posted by HiImJeremy

Back in the times when Shamans were common people to go to for healing and guidance, the villagers would bring something with them or do something for the Shaman for the shamans expertise.

For men only. Women please click on a thread on knitting or cooking...

Once a reporter asked a Red Indian Chief:

“For ninety years you have been living in reservations, watching ‘pale faces‘ and what merits they have achieved in that time. When you look back, what to you are the greatest mistakes the ‘pale faces’ have made?

The Chief ponders this question for a moment and then he says: “Before ‘pale faces’ come, Red Indians rule the land. No tax, no debt, plenty buffalo, plenty beaver, water clean...women do all the work. Shaman for free. Men hunt all day and catch fish and bonk all night.“

And then he smiled and added: “But ‘pale face’ idiot enough to think that it possible to improve this system.

Merrick

[royster]

Originally Posted by royster

It stuns me that people call themselves "Christian", yet adhere to only the teachings that benefit their comfort. If you have no real faith in Jesus' teachings, or are unwilling to live them, who might your Master be? If you haven't studied them, is it just a costume you put on, this "Christianity"?

It causes me to wonder if the mainstream consider bible stories simply Disney tales to amuse children.

The topic is very relevent to Moses leading enslaved people out of Egypt. There is no doubt many supported the existing money/hierarchy system of Moses' day: they chaced Moses through the neighborhood. But this points out that throughout history, the universe lead its children to a higher ideal. Invariably, the mainstream mentality laughed at the higher ideal, because it threatened their comforts and sytem of control. The people of Noah's day laughed all the way to the swimming pool and jaccuzzi, while Sodom and Gamorra were too drunk to figure out the fireworks. Invariably, the mentality of those people was based on man's enslavement system, and "God" intervened. Do you think there's something to that, or is this just uncanny coincidence? Are you repeating the very same mentailty and dismissing it as "Oh, that was THEN!" as if something changed? Many have the honesty to see that nothing has changed, as regards to how human society works; only the clothing has changed. Solomon said "There is nothing new under the sun."

So you can follow Disney, or you can ascend toward a higher ideal of life. The higher ideal requires rejecting money-systems and their attendant trappings.

And the topic is: barter is not much of a real alternative, when observed with scrutiny.

THANK YOU, Merrick, for the multiple-meaning story. An excellent illustration.