Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since it's very unlikely the rest of the world will adopt a 500 year old economic culture that was falling apart when the Spanish took over, how this would actually be a beneficial system for America in the 21st century is past magical thinking. It's closer to LSD hallucinations.
The rest of the world doesn't need to adopt the system.
The U.S.A. can simply cut off foreign trade.
The liberals have been screaming for 12 years that we shouldn't send our military to fight wars in the Middle East(wait, make that from 2001-2009, once President Obama was elected, the leftist war protestors became strangely silent), one would think that they would embrace isolation.
In the midst of the Democrat government shutdown and the upcoming debt ceiling debate(for which President Obama still refuses to negotiate), why don't consider what it would be like if the central element that these issues revolve upon - money - did not exist?
Consider the Inca Empire - which consolidated a vast territory in western South America and developed a wealthy and strong civilization that lasted for nearly 100 years(before the evil white man - came across the Atlantic).
The Incan Empire growth and power lasted through ONE king, after which it began a long decline till collapse.
There is little evidence that the power and accumulated wealth did much to benefit the population as a whole, who toiled to benefit the throne's interests.
I am NOT arguing about whether it's required to produce a printed currency to have a good economy. I'm just pointing out that you need better examples.
While the achievements of the Inca Empire are impressive, they were the products of an agrarian society with a totalitarian political structure. They were in no way a true socialist society. And the principles of modern socialism are not based upon monetary wealth at all. They are based on the idea that control of a society's resources should belong to the people as a whole. Monetary wealth in our society is a significant social resource. Monetary wealth was not a social resource of the Inca Empire. But there was also no socialist conception that the resources of that society belonged to the society as a whole. Resources were controlled, completely controlled, by the rulers of the Empire. The vast labor supply was a resource the rulers utilized.
Who says that money/currency has to be gold or paper or virtual?
The vast labor supply was the currency that the Incan rulers used to advance their civilization .. so in a nutshell, the historians are wrong .. The monitary structure of the empire was human flesh ...
Our worthless paper money is the only thing standing in the way between us and our rulers even today. Take the paper/gold/virtual away? and all they have is us ... A cashless society isn't really cashless after all ...
Communism is, in all honesty, the most perfect form of economy. The problem is, man is not perfect, and therefor, communism can never exist in it's true form. Carl Marx was a man centuries ahead of his time. The problem is, his peers, and even those after him, are/were stuck in the stone age.
The Incas were obviously extraordinarily intelligent and advanced people. In many ways, those "evil white men" were intelligent too... Just in different regards. As a white man, we have some deficits that we need to work on before the society you speak of could exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks
How's the Inca Empire doing these days?
Not so well after the Spanish introduced their germs...
Who says that money/currency has to be gold or paper or virtual?
The vast labor supply was the currency that the Incan rulers used to advance their civilization .. so in a nutshell, the historians are wrong .. The monitary structure of the empire was human flesh ...
Our worthless paper money is the only thing standing in the way between us and our rulers even today. Take the paper/gold/virtual away? and all they have is us ... A cashless society isn't really cashless after all ...
This is still essentially the same. Nothing happens without people in an economy. This is where the primary value is, always has.
Creating a separate representation of this, that becomes controlled, obviously gives the ones in control of that separate representation an advantage.
It's also a bit easier to manage the herd if they believe they have more room to roam.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
- came across the Atlantic). 
