TED Conversations

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Why do we still live in a monetary based economy? How can we make our current system more efficient, less wasteful and overall sustainable?

Is there a better system that we could follow that is based around improving quality of life for all humans and to increase resource efficiency? I am not proposing that we don’t use a type of currency for trade, what I am saying is that our current system is not working efficiently and not improving human life. Money is the focal point and it traps people in it through debt. Our dependence on money has many adverse affects. It is limiting our potential and stopping sustainable progression.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to live in a society were we do things to their full potential. Maximise efficiency and minimise waste. A system that is transparent with no class distinction. That provides the basic needs of life for free; Food, shelter, education and cloths. No strings attached, nothing locking you in. We live once so while fill it with things that add nothing to your life our others?

Im not saying we should do this or that, I am saying that there are flaws in our current system, how can we change it to make it better? How can we make our current system more efficient, less wasteful and overall sustainable??

Topics: community society
+2
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • May 9 2013: What do humans need to survive in the most basic sense?

    Food
    Shelter/clothing
    Education

    Why do these things cost money? Who has the right, who is cruel enough to deny these basic necessities of life to anyone? We live in a world today with the resources and know how to meet this demand. Yet we do nothing because the economical system we live in would collapse. I say that right there is a redundant system. A system with a purpose, that is not in the best interests of humanity.

    Technology has advanced to the stage where it has and is going to continue to replace jobs because machines are more efficient and reliable. That’s a good thing, taking people away from mundane and repetitive tasks to give them the opportunity to live a more fulfilling life.

    Currently though this advancement in our civilization has had adverse affects because of how we regulate our resources through the trade of money. We all live and die, that is nature’s law. Why should there be a price on life, it was given so why aren’t the necessities to live given also?

    What gives people authority of possession over land? It was there a long time before we got here and is going to be there a lot longer when we aren’t. Shouldn’t it be used in a strategic and sustainable way to improve humanities quality of life and the life of the creatures we share it with?

    I believe the key to moving towards this way of life is awareness through education. Moving our focus away from the small things in today’s society which are most likely just symptoms of the cause: We will never fix the cause by just treating the symptoms. Use the symptoms to diagnose the cause.

    Imagine that tomorrow there was no money. We no longer need to fight to survive; we have advanced to the point where we can provide for everyone. Lets make history, you and I. We were the ones that ended poverty, pollution and inequality. That’s a legacy to pass on to the next generation to be proud of!
    • thumb
      May 9 2013: Adam, I have mostly stayed away from this conversation, but I kind to have to side with Mr. Pintier on this matter. You speak of food and providing it to the people. Let's just look at that one issue. Not all food is grow in all places. It is a big globe. So, how do we grown, package, transport food stuffs from here to there. for example. there is not enough rice grown in the far east to meet demand. Rice is imported from California and Arkansas. So, just how do the thousands if not tens of thousands of people involved in getting that rice from here to there and the rice is given to a person in Indochina sustained? Can you imagine any machine or system to do that. I can''t. Is it possible in a thousand years... don't know. But, what I do know that these conversations of would and could are nice exercises in imagination but, really don't offer plausible solutions.
      There are many current problems that have plausible solutions that members of TED can address and with some luck, maybe someone will hit on a solution.... stranger things have happened.
      To deal with solutions that are the figment of science fiction authors is... well... fun, but really is a waste of valuable time and talent.
      • May 10 2013: When I go to a supermarket and see where a large portion of food was made, I wonder how many countries that ship went past that needed that product more then I. Why did that ship come to my country instead of stopping at there’s, money. The people that make this product are interested in making money so they can survive. We then have an excessive amount of food in a one place instead of the other because it has a higher chance to make a better profit. Have a look at the data about how much food gets wasted at groceries stores in wealth countries. They justify this because even though there is a huge waste, they are still making more money then they would’ve if they took it else where.

        We have the means to meet this demand today but just don’t because there is no money. You need money to make demand.

        Food shortage is a myth.

        Distribution of what we have is just inefficient.

        There are a lot of hidden costs to the way we do business. For example watch on YouTube: The hidden costs of hamburgers.

        Why isn’t it plausible??
    • May 10 2013: Adam.

      Food
      Shelter/clothing
      Education

      "Why do these things cost money?"
      i believe in our current system these things would be far to expensive for our governments to deliver to its people, thats world wide. hense get the new age slaves to feed and cloth them selves while still mantaining the status quo.

      "Who has the right, who is cruel enough to deny these basic necessities of life to anyone?"
      our elected officials have this right handed to them by the people (us) and we do little to fight for these things to be delivered by those governments. i dont think its a matter of being cruel its the logistica of it again in this system its just not feasable.

      but i think you have answered your own question on these points.

      "Why should there be a price on life, it was given so why aren’t the necessities to live given also?"
      im not sure what you mean by price on life unless your talking about the cost of living if so again we are going to fall back into a repetative droning of the current economic system that can only function in this manner, if every thing was for free it would collapse and you could just imagine the corporate controlled media headlines with that: "if you stop purchasing things TERRORIST WILL KILL YOUR FAMILY"

      "What gives people authority of possession over land? It was there a long time before we got here and is going to be there a lot longer when we aren’t. Shouldn’t it be used in a strategic and sustainable way to improve humanities quality of life and the life of the creatures we share it with?"
      so from this point of view i could see a few problems, although the idea is excellent in theory, if all land was up for grabs who is entitled to what? any thing and every thing? how do we police this land grab?

      what your saying here is perfect world stuff and as a poeple we should alsways be striving for a perfect world but this is a shift that wont happe over night, gradual steps and changes in the processes and the way we think can bring about change.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.