Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Re: Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Postby Zaniwhoop » Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:27 pm

Quote from NoName
The only reason people will sit at a stinky bench for hours soldering & fixing stuff is because they get paid more for it than they would if they were stacking shelves. It's a hard, fiddly, smelly job - and as I said before I simply don't believe anyone would do it out of choice - and I'm 100% sure that you could not find enough people to successfully manufacture DVD players on an industrial scale...

So, using the example of the DVD player: It is my contention that you would not be able to find a workforce to build, pack and ship them. Extending this out - I further contend that there would be no 'corporations' to buy DVD players (or indeed any industrially fabricated product) from
I wouldn't mind doing a bit of soldering now and again if it was for the good of the ALL, though I am not particularly skilled or experienced in such a thing (just soldered a few things at home when needed).

You are of course quite right that there would be no 'corporations' to buy DVD players, but I think you are missing the point there, as there would still likely be consumers who will happily take a free DVD player and enjoy it. Also with no more need for built in redundancy or obsolescence most new products would last for an extremely long time.

Love and Light

Si
Shaw's principle.
"A government which robs Peter
to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul"

Sublato fundamento cadit opus The foundation being removed, the superstructure falls.
User avatar
Zaniwhoop
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: South West Wales

Re: Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Postby AzziDePazzi » Wed Jul 08, 2009 2:19 pm

Zaniwhoop wrote:Quote from NoName
The only reason people will sit at a stinky bench for hours soldering & fixing stuff is because they get paid more for it than they would if they were stacking shelves. It's a hard, fiddly, smelly job - and as I said before I simply don't believe anyone would do it out of choice - and I'm 100% sure that you could not find enough people to successfully manufacture DVD players on an industrial scale...

So, using the example of the DVD player: It is my contention that you would not be able to find a workforce to build, pack and ship them. Extending this out - I further contend that there would be no 'corporations' to buy DVD players (or indeed any industrially fabricated product) from
I wouldn't mind doing a bit of soldering now and again if it was for the good of the ALL, though I am not particularly skilled or experienced in such a thing (just soldered a few things at home when needed).

You are of course quite right that there would be no 'corporations' to buy DVD players, but I think you are missing the point there, as there would still likely be consumers who will happily take a free DVD player and enjoy it. Also with no more need for built in redundancy or obsolescence most new products would last for an extremely long time.

Love and Light

Si


No one has questioned how necessary DVD players are?

Surely, any debate regarding the voluntary work involved to produce a product would boil down to the necessity of the item in question.

However. Say it takes 5 man hours to produce 100 DVD players. Are 5 people willing to supply an hour each for a free DVD player and fair share of the return from the subsequent PRIVATE EXCHANGE of the 95 remaining players. Remember, this whole fictional mess is because of the mix-up of Public/Private accounting. The 95 remaining DVD's, would supply the 95 people who are happy to exchange their labor elsewhere using their own personal skills/helpfulness.

Paraphrase, I think "The Tablemaker agrees to make 1 table for the Chairmakers 4 chairs. The hairdresser already has tables and chairs, but the Table/Chairmakers both need haircuts." - This is where a medium for PRIVATE EXCHANGE (eg, what money should have been) is required. All of this whilst not worrying about taxes and survival, of course.

Hang on a minute, have I just defined some kind of liberal communism? =/

Not having enough volunteers to produce something might render it unneeded, thus, not really worth it. Good way to self-regulate the cleaning up of consumerism if you ask me. Yeah, you asked. =)

For and on the record, :grin: , I'd happily pack something mindlessly for a few hours a day, as long as I got one of what I was packing and I could skin up at lunch time =) DVD's aren't important to me, so I would probably pack the water purifiers or something.

Finally, on the actual subject of commercial redemption. I think the official route, staying in the waters and sailing your vessel, is an arduous one. The ones who abuse this won't last long (or become greedy and re-absorbed, so to speak), so the ones who make the most of it will be acting consciously - e.g. Not greedy. The ones giving foreclosed homes back to their families, educating and ensuring their communities are safe etc.. Sure, they are covering themselves by making sure their investments are covered and claimed back etc. but it is hard work that takes a lot of study and confidence. Operating as a Creditor in this society is an uphill struggle, so I've never regarded that route as a walk in the park. From what I can see, someone who is within the system and applying commercial redemption remedies has to let go of their traditional view to money and currency anyway.

For any truly 'freemanic' community to exist, among other core skills, it will take people who know commercial redemption principles inside-out to support those around them. That means, if you're an off-the-books Freeman-on-the-land who is in trouble and I am happy operating in-the-matrix, sailing the commercial seas, I help you because it is right. No payback, no need for returns from you, just helping humanity along.

The only way a large-scale shift in society could take place is with support from intermediaries - like police offices/accountants/(gulp)lawyers/etc.. who have had their paradigm shift and have decided to join and/or help 'the cause'. Imagine how much of an asset a single helpful and dutiful Notary with a conscience would be? Or a Peace Officer making sure the Policing Officer is being lawful?

All the very cunning plan (Rob's/Veronica's/Whoever's) stuff, basically =)
AzziDePazzi
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:43 am

Re: Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Postby Michaelangelo Coparo » Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:46 pm

Awesome thread. I love the philosophical side to this.

I don't believe anyone has mentioned Nanotech. Which itself has potential for very good and very bad. Very good production wise. Almost like a star trek food replicator but products instead of food.

I dont really wanna promote the Venus project but commercial redemption and some of the venus projects ideas may work together
Michaelangelo Coparo
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Postby AzziDePazzi » Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:41 pm

Michaelangelo Coparo wrote:Awesome thread. I love the philosophical side to this.

I don't believe anyone has mentioned Nanotech. Which itself has potential for very good and very bad. Very good production wise. Almost like a star trek food replicator but products instead of food.

I dont really wanna promote the Venus project but commercial redemption and some of the venus projects ideas may work together


I'm not really a fan of the Venus project either y'know. Zeitgeist was my eye-opener film, something didn't feel right about the 2nd one to me. I don't know - many of these ideas run the risk of being socialism in disguise.

I see the whole commercial redemption stuff as the in-between of what we have now and what we eventually get to.

Nanobots are the start of the end of the world aren't they? :P
AzziDePazzi
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:43 am

Re: Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Postby Zaniwhoop » Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:50 pm

AzziDePazzi wrote:No one has questioned how necessary DVD players are?
Well, not in this thread, but my wife Angie (IamALLthatIam) has. She'd far rather go to a live concert than sit and listen to a DVD. Personally I enjoy both, but I guess the social side of a live gig is probably more rewarding to all concerned. But your overall point is very good, how necessary and desirable are many of the things we are lead to believe are so?

AzziDePazzi wrote: Paraphrase, I think "The Tablemaker agrees to make 1 table for the Chairmakers 4 chairs. The hairdresser already has tables and chairs, but the Table/Chairmakers both need haircuts." - This is where a medium for PRIVATE EXCHANGE (eg, what money should have been) is required.
Precisely what money should have been, and would be, if people were aware of their full spiritual reality and were not shut up in collective physical body consciousness, with it's greed and survival instincts. The trouble is it is an accumulative and inheritable commodity, and is already way toooo out of balance in it's distribution for any sort of fairness to be reclaimed, as far as I can see, we really just need to be able to see it for the belief system it truly is. I think as far as the Hairdresser in your example goes, they would be doing it because they enjoyed the art of hairdressing occasionally, and as everything they need or want would be free for them anyway then there is no need for exchange in the sense that we think of it currently. The thanks and recognition of the artistry would be reward enough.
Shaw's principle.
"A government which robs Peter
to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul"

Sublato fundamento cadit opus The foundation being removed, the superstructure falls.
User avatar
Zaniwhoop
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: South West Wales

Re: Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Postby AzziDePazzi » Wed Jul 08, 2009 10:22 pm

Zaniwhoop wrote: I think as far as the Hairdresser in your example goes, they would be doing it because they enjoyed the art of hairdressing occasionally, and as everything they need or want would be free for them anyway then there is no need for exchange in the sense that we think of it currently. The thanks and recognition of the artistry would be reward enough.


I agree wholeheartedly, should there be an 'everything for free' situation. Problem is, every time I think of that motif, I have trouble imagining that everything isn't white and the same, so as to be fair and unconsumerlike. =)
AzziDePazzi
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:43 am

Re: Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Postby Michaelangelo Coparo » Thu Jul 09, 2009 12:37 pm

Im sure youd be able to personalise your 'objects' :D
Michaelangelo Coparo
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Postby markie b » Thu Jul 09, 2009 12:44 pm

Michaelangelo Coparo wrote:Im sure youd be able to personalise your 'objects' :D


nothing a blow torch or welder couldnt sort out :rotfl: do you want some stuff personalised?il do it :saint:
when injustice becomes law
rebellion becomes duty
markie b
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:42 am

Re: Commercial 'Redemption' - Does it make sense?(recovered)

Postby traderfluff » Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:17 pm

To your analogy to whether Mary Croft is right or wrong is in your perception of where we are in the world today. so you judge on that alone..

lets look.
we all know the money system is false..
the unsecured debt can be written off no questions,
but secured debt is harder because of its a deed ( A deed is a signed and usually sealed legal instrument in writing used to grant a right)

Legal instrument is a legal term of art that is used for any formally executed writing that can be formally attributed to its author,[1] records and formally expresses a legally enforceable act, process,[2] or contractual duty, obligation, or right, and therefore evidences that act, process, or agreement[3].[4] Examples include a certificate, deed, bond, contract, will, legislative act, notarial act, court writ or pleading, or any law passed by a competent legislative body in municipal (domestic) or international law. Many legal instruments were written under seal by affixing a wax or paper seal to the document in evidence of its legal execution and authenticity (which often removes the need for consideration in contract law); however, today most jurisdictions have done away with the requirement of documents being under seal in order to give them legal effect. Others, e.g. Australia, have re-interpreted sealing as a formally attested signature.

So basically the deception is an act.

Good luck....
Emotions come and go but what you stand for lasts forever...
http://traderfluff.blogspot.com
User avatar
traderfluff
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:01 pm

Previous

Return to Live Birth Trusts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest