What you speak of is Communism and wherever it had been tried in any society on this planet, it has failed. When everything you need is in your immediate environment, do you ever ask where, who, and what effort was required to put it there? It would NOT alleviate any issues that you mentioned above because we, as people, are greedy. It's not like people are going to stop hoarding material wealth just because they already have enough to survive on.
It is better to know the source of people's intention (which is money) and assuming/anticipating their actions accordingly than pretend everything is good and well and get a nasty surprise at the end.
I'm confused. I said nothing about Communism, nor did I describe it, as far as I can see.
I think it is important to note the italics I used when writing the word "need." I wrote need in italics intentionally, so as to differentiate between necessity and luxury.
Anything we need is in nature. Anything that has to be put there is not something we need, or there would have been no one to put it there in the first place.
I don't think we are inherently greedy. I believe that greed is born through the illusion of scarcity. If everyone knew there was enough to go around, I wouldn't be so sure that they'd still be greedy. Sounds like an interesting experiment.
Well that's my point. People horde material wealth because they believe that it's every man for themself, and that there isn't enough to go around. So no, I wouldn't expect someone to part with their shit under those circumstances.
This is kinda why I wrote this. Are you saying that you just assume everyone who interacts with you on Steemit is just doing so for potential future monetary gain?
I think we're just going to argue without reaching a mutual agreement because of our inherently opposite view of human nature. This is always an issue when discussing ideas which is encompassing and vague in scope. You have your valid points and if I came off as condescending, I apologize.
I think it is important to note the italics I used when writing the word "need." I wrote need in italics intentionally, so as to differentiate between necessity and luxury.
Anything we need is in nature. Anything that has to be put there is not something we need, or there would have been no one to put it there in the first place.
Anything you need is in nature. This is true. However, I'll pick foods for my concrete example. Foods are a by product of human effort. You need foods in this modern day but would you go out into a forest 100 miles away from your house to gather berries? Both necessity AND luxury today require effort which comes from someone somewhere. You cannot magically summon foods equally for everyone and all will be happy. Work needs to be done.
I'm confused. I said nothing about Communism, nor did I describe it, as far as I can see.
You did not mention Communism but the idea that everyone has every basic needs satisfied disregarding how much effort one contributes is essentially Communism.
I don't think we are inherently greedy. I believe that greed is born through the illusion of scarcity. If everyone knew there was enough to go around, I wouldn't be so sure that they'd still be greedy. Sounds like an interesting experiment.
Which is why I mentioned Communism because the idea has been and is still experimented. The end result is almost always the same. Given power, almost everyone will eventually become greedy. It is not the illusion of scarcity for the corrupted government officials. It is the unquenchable thirst for power and wealth that drives them. There are multiple cases where people who acknowledge material scarcity and are still willing to give them up, being homeless, beggar, poor. But it will always be the one with power who wants to stay in power to fuck shit up.
This is kinda why I wrote this. Are you saying that you just assume everyone who interacts with you on Steemit is just doing so for potential future monetary gain?
Almost everyone. Others are interacting with me because they see value in my post and want to exchange ideas, even conflicting ones.
This comment just kind of comes out of nowhere, IMO. Communism? Communism is a type of government. OP is talking about culture, particularly concerns of building a culture of fakes. Sharing and openness and genuineness are not immediately equated as evil because some of the Communist ideas might mirror them.
Frankly, all this calling everything socialism or communism as a buzz word to disagree with other's ideas is getting old.
Please let this die because if communism is a buzzword in 2017, then I must be using Internet Explorer.
OP said people without scarcity mentality will not compete with each other because their needs are satisfied. I said that wasn't the case for the last 100 years because communism attempted to achieve the same goal and it was not able to. It's not name-calling but a direct example to support my statement ffs.
Sharing and openness and genuineness are not evil as long as people don't fake them for the sake of earning Steem. That is what being discussed. My point is that even with all the Steem people hold in their bags, they will keep doing whatever benefits their pocket best. You cannot expect people to stop being fake when it brings them money.
Frankly, all this talk could be avoided if Steemit took away all forms of reward distribution for 3 days and just took the money from all the whales and divide them evenly among all users. Just for 3 days, that would be an interesting experiment to see.
You know what, I completely missed the big, bold paragraph at the end of the article. Your reference to communism makes a bit more sense now.
It's cool as long as we can argue a bit and still keep it civilized. I like these bantering much more than other stuff.
My sentiments exactly.