Neoreactionaries

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

He makes a point. The problem is, the currency of commerce has come to take the place of subsistence, to such a degree that those who have more of the currency of commerce actually have the power to withhold access to subsistence from those who do not have enough of it.

This is a big, big problem.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

He makes a point. The problem is, the currency of commerce has come to take the place of subsistence, to such a degree that those who have more of the currency of commerce actually have the power to withhold access to subsistence from those who do not have enough of it.

This is a big, big problem.

Yeah, not disputing that.  I'm just trying to think of any method of commerce that wouldn't be worse.

[Salty]

He makes a point. The problem is, the currency of commerce has come to take the place of subsistence, to such a degree that those who have more of the currency of commerce actually have the power to withhold access to subsistence from those who do not have enough of it.

This is a big, big problem.

Yeah, not disputing that.  I'm just trying to think of any method of commerce that wouldn't be worse.

At this point?

One big slot machine.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

He makes a point. The problem is, the currency of commerce has come to take the place of subsistence, to such a degree that those who have more of the currency of commerce actually have the power to withhold access to subsistence from those who do not have enough of it.

This is a big, big problem.

Yeah, not disputing that.  I'm just trying to think of any method of commerce that wouldn't be worse.

The problem isn't the method of commerce, the problem is applying the concept of commerce to every aspect of life. Since we no longer live in an environment where it is possible for people without money to build a shelter and forage or subsistence farm for a living, we need something that replaces that. Money does a poor job of replacing it.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

He makes a point. The problem is, the currency of commerce has come to take the place of subsistence, to such a degree that those who have more of the currency of commerce actually have the power to withhold access to subsistence from those who do not have enough of it.

This is a big, big problem.

Yeah, not disputing that.  I'm just trying to think of any method of commerce that wouldn't be worse.

At this point?

One big slot machine.

Naw.  The system works.  It's not flawless by any stretch of the imagination, but it functions.

The problem isn't the currency, or the concept of currency.  The problem is the repealing of regulations designed to keep the playing field at least KINDA level, that has been going on since 1981.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

He makes a point. The problem is, the currency of commerce has come to take the place of subsistence, to such a degree that those who have more of the currency of commerce actually have the power to withhold access to subsistence from those who do not have enough of it.

This is a big, big problem.

Yeah, not disputing that.  I'm just trying to think of any method of commerce that wouldn't be worse.

The problem isn't the method of commerce, the problem is applying the concept of commerce to every aspect of life. Since we no longer live in an environment where it is possible for people without money to build a shelter and forage or subsistence farm for a living, we need something that replaces that. Money does a poor job of replacing it.

Hell, here in Arizona, they bill you a fee - forwarded to the utility companies, for each solar panel...so the utility companies don't lose money.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Basically, money is fine for commerce, but the concept originated at a time before EVERYTHING was commodified. It needs to be refined for our evolving society, which several countries have already figured out.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

He makes a point. The problem is, the currency of commerce has come to take the place of subsistence, to such a degree that those who have more of the currency of commerce actually have the power to withhold access to subsistence from those who do not have enough of it.

This is a big, big problem.

Yeah, not disputing that.  I'm just trying to think of any method of commerce that wouldn't be worse.

The problem isn't the method of commerce, the problem is applying the concept of commerce to every aspect of life. Since we no longer live in an environment where it is possible for people without money to build a shelter and forage or subsistence farm for a living, we need something that replaces that. Money does a poor job of replacing it.

Hell, here in Arizona, they bill you a fee - forwarded to the utility companies, for each solar panel...so the utility companies don't lose money.

Yep. Totally fine to tax a fee that's sent to for-profit corporations so that your independence doesn't cost them money... but propose that a similar tax be levied on businesses to subsidize electricity use for the poor? SOCIALIST!!!

[The Good Reverend Roger]

He makes a point. The problem is, the currency of commerce has come to take the place of subsistence, to such a degree that those who have more of the currency of commerce actually have the power to withhold access to subsistence from those who do not have enough of it.

This is a big, big problem.

Yeah, not disputing that.  I'm just trying to think of any method of commerce that wouldn't be worse.

The problem isn't the method of commerce, the problem is applying the concept of commerce to every aspect of life. Since we no longer live in an environment where it is possible for people without money to build a shelter and forage or subsistence farm for a living, we need something that replaces that. Money does a poor job of replacing it.

Hell, here in Arizona, they bill you a fee - forwarded to the utility companies, for each solar panel...so the utility companies don't lose money.

Yep. Totally fine to tax a fee that's sent to for-profit corporations so that your independence doesn't cost them money... but propose that a similar tax be levied on businesses to subsidize electricity use for the poor? SOCIALIST!!!

I've gone to being more or less socialist over the last 10 years, strictly on account of the excesses displayed by capitalists.

[Reginald Ret]

I think you misunderstand me.
Money as we know it, as a system, is violent.
This is because money is set up as a system of survival vouchers, meaning that whenever money is in play, people with less access to money are forced, literally forced at the threat of violence, to succumb to the whims of those with more access to money. In other words, when you use survival vouchers to manage an economy, you are setting up a system of class domination. And when those with more access exercise the choice of how to dispense the money they have, they are exercising dominance over others. No matter how generous they think they are being.

Well said, that.
There are three ways i see to improve this.
1. Use city planning and cultural changes to make survival independent or less dependent of money. I'm not saying everyone should become a farmer on top of their normal workload but i am sure several things can be done to improve the current situation. Small scale vertical farming in cities comes to mind. (ZOMG SOCIAL ENGINEERING! HITLER DID THAT!)
2. Political changes that give the poor sufficient protection. (ZOMG SOCIALISM! STALIN DID THAT!)
3. Invent a new way for people to take care of themselves without using money. (ZOMG SCIFI! STAR TREK DID THAT!)

As you can see, neither is really acceptable to the dominant predator on this planet¹.


1^{Corporations, who did you think i was talking about?}

[LMNO]

Hell, here in Arizona, they bill you a fee - forwarded to the utility companies, for each solar panel...so the utility companies don't lose money.

I first heard that a couple of days ago.  It's incredibly hard to wrap my mind around it.  When you generate excess energy, you can dump it back into the grid... and you have to pay for them to receive free energy?

[Junkenstein]

Hell, here in Arizona, they bill you a fee - forwarded to the utility companies, for each solar panel...so the utility companies don't lose money.

I first heard that a couple of days ago.  It's incredibly hard to wrap my mind around it.  When you generate excess energy, you can dump it back into the grid... and you have to pay for them to receive free energy?

I'm guessing the sums you are able to "earn" though this are practically nothing. Which makes me question what the incentive is to have a two way supply. If you're able to generate an excess, surely it's just better to cut out the power company entirely?

There's probably a charge for that too.

[LMNO]

I believe the problem in general are ineffecient batteries, so excess power generated can't be easily stored.  Any you want to still be connected to the grid, for things like rainy days and cataclysmic events.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

He makes a point. The problem is, the currency of commerce has come to take the place of subsistence, to such a degree that those who have more of the currency of commerce actually have the power to withhold access to subsistence from those who do not have enough of it.

This is a big, big problem.

Yeah, not disputing that.  I'm just trying to think of any method of commerce that wouldn't be worse.

The problem isn't the method of commerce, the problem is applying the concept of commerce to every aspect of life. Since we no longer live in an environment where it is possible for people without money to build a shelter and forage or subsistence farm for a living, we need something that replaces that. Money does a poor job of replacing it.

Hell, here in Arizona, they bill you a fee - forwarded to the utility companies, for each solar panel...so the utility companies don't lose money.

Yep. Totally fine to tax a fee that's sent to for-profit corporations so that your independence doesn't cost them money... but propose that a similar tax be levied on businesses to subsidize electricity use for the poor? SOCIALIST!!!

I've gone to being more or less socialist over the last 10 years, strictly on account of the excesses displayed by capitalists.

Yeah, me too.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Hell, here in Arizona, they bill you a fee - forwarded to the utility companies, for each solar panel...so the utility companies don't lose money.

I first heard that a couple of days ago.  It's incredibly hard to wrap my mind around it.  When you generate excess energy, you can dump it back into the grid... and you have to pay for them to receive free energy?

I'm guessing the sums you are able to "earn" though this are practically nothing. Which makes me question what the incentive is to have a two way supply. If you're able to generate an excess, surely it's just better to cut out the power company entirely?

There's probably a charge for that too.

The charge is levied whether or not you put power back into the grid.