Money in any shape or form is absolutely completely and totally unnecessary. No If's no buts and no doubts.
There is absolutely nothing that we do now that we couldn't do if we abolished all forms of currency. In fact, it would mean that we could do far more. Please discuss

So say people have all their wealth in money, maybe £100,000 what would happen if you abolished all forms of currency, who would be abolishing the currency?

So say people have all their wealth in money, maybe £100,000 what would happen if you abolished all forms of currency, who would be abolishing the currency?

There is absolutely nothing that we do now that we couldn't do if we abolished all forms of currency

Two excellent answers, key points so far;

We see the masses of people will have to abolish it, and we see that the process of production and labour will have to be revolutionized from an outdated economic exchange based system to a system based on providing for need.
"what is pro­posed here is noth­ing less than evo­lu­tion."

We also see there will be considerable opposition to the achievement of this aim.

I'm all ears guys.

Guevarista wrote:
The general average public have to learn to abolish it at a grass roots level, I don't see this idea ever coming from the top because its not in their interests to do so.

Alvin Hall would be at a bit of a loose end.

And you couldn't do this.

According to KOTG, this would lead to eugenics.

Without money, they have nothing. All the power ultimately comes from money. It's crazy when you think about it.

Guevarista wrote:
Yes gue, for the evolution (which is in effect what it'd be) to take place, yourself and andy are right. It'd have to come from the masses. No way the money men are gonna suggest it You're bang on that production and labour would shift toward accommodating needs, though not necessarily exclusively so.

I think you're right that from here, there'd be massive opposition from the ground up. People would have pretty much all their fear buttons pressed at once. Once they were helped to understand that they could still have everything they needed, I could see that opposition falling away relatively quickly though tbh

A resource based society would be beneficial for all but a tiny fraction of 1% of the population at the top who like to fly around in personal jets, own several yachts, millions of acres etc. They are the only ones who would lose out but even they would stand to make quite significant spiritual gains.

andyh wrote:
Most labour that is performed is utterly redundant in a Maslow's hierarchy of need stylee - the things we actually need to the things that give us fulfillment - banjos, MP3 players, the complete works of Shakespeare and the like. We don't need ;lots of people telephining us to ask us if we need a new kitchen. And if you abandon the impetus to flog us moretat, you should consume less. Aside from things like computers, most things should last a long time. Take a sofa - a well constructed sofa should last for years on end. Ecept people are encouraged they need a swish new MFI sofa. Or a washing machine - there is no reason it should not last 10-20 years. These things used to. But if they break after about two you need to buy another. Which wastes resources in the pursuit of profit. And wastes labour. Advertising, marketing, all that stuff - it doesn't actually do anything useful.
But people need jobs to support themselves and people without jobs create problems because they can't. I think socialistic policies kinda help in that environment just by protecting people from it - like the NHS and state benefits for example. But they do not solve the problem, they mitigate the effects. It's giving a sick man a painkiller. That's fine to dull the pain, but it doesn't cure the ailment.
Take away the need for people to earn money to live and take away the need to perform useless labour so they can earn money to live and Bob's your uncle. Like you said, a lot of pepole enjoy work. They enjoy it more if they feel it's positive and not just working for the man to make ends meet. Even with Andy's self employment thing, that still arises from a need to earn money and people might e.g. face the prospect of their business collapsing and their house repossessed. Take away the FEAR of the yawning chasm of financial ruin and thing of the stress that alleviates.

But then how is Bono going to justify having an enormous mansion just from making pop music?