Building the Ship; 1 economics

[MKBParticipant 51]

 

Building the Ship; 1 economics

The first topic I would like to discuss is economics.

—–

Being the first topic and to grow interest I will explain why I have chosen to discuss such topics and take this path. The notion of society collapsing is on every persons’ mind. Most people including myself have no problem with this happening, empires rise and fall. I do not care if the ship sinks simply because the ship deserves it. However I liked the ship, it has sailed many waters and even though there is plenty of s~~~ I still had fun. Why should we care about making a new ship? After all if the ship sinks then people smarter than me will design a new ship then all will be fine again. In order for me to answer this question I have to know, who will design the ship? and what will the new ship be like? I love having a ship, it beats the hell out of swimming in the ocean. The ocean will swallow up a person rather quickly after all and that fear is what keeps bad leaders in power. However the problem is, is that it very likely that the new ship will be built almost identical to the old ship and that is something I would like to avoid. Even if the ship does not sink I do not want to continue maintaining it. Does any MGTOW want to live in a place in which he has little say in most aspects of his life, especially his labor? Designing a new ship is difficult, history can prove that, but it can and will be worth it. The United States is a perfect example and I am glad to have been born in it. We are not forced to design a new ship, democracies are great because it is a system that facilitates such change. The reason I propose the designing of a new ship is that I do not think that the system will be able to change sufficiently and in a timely manner for the proposals I have in mind.

As a new MGTOW I recently learned of gynocentrism and hypergamy. These traits can be changed if there is a greater alternative system that promotes different behaviors. Evolution tells us, as time passes traits that lead to success will be passed on to the next generation and behaviors can become traits. These traits will never change as long as it is successful and MGTOW is the result of these crude traits being successful. We have a choice, we can choose to stand still and die out or move forward. Which direction is forward is something that we have to be continuously thinking about, that is survival. When trying to change any basic trait you first have to satisfy the basic needs of a person, food, shelter, and clothing, in a different way. These basic needs are why men have created civilizations in the first place and are the things women try to gain from us with as little work as possible. Over time women went from negotiation to exploitation and with the advent of money there became a single item to acquire. This appears to be common knowledge for MGTOWs. Now the hard part is what traits do we want and how can we promote the behaviors to make those traits. Gynocentrism and hypergamy is something that is no longer necessary for our survival, but the systems based on these are still in place.

—–

The world has a fixed number of resources. This scientific fact means that we cannot have whatever we want. The allocation of these resources is essential to the well being of the population. Supply and demand is the old testament of economics. I like to call it the old testament not because it is old but because it was developed in a world that no longer exists, is not rooted in science, and has a sizable religious following. Science was applied later and just made a mess. The biggest problem I have with supply and demand is that it encourages the exploitation and destruction of resources. Although many laws have been developed to curb those tendencies, the behavior is still remains. Look at the bloated industrial machine that is now the United States and you can see how these behaviors reek havoc on the world and everything in it. I see this as the finally of supply and demand in economics. Sustainability is the only logical choice of a civilization. Why would you live in a place where food could disappear at any moment? The Earth has a limit to how many healthy sustainable lives can fit in it and supply and demand can not efficiently determine this limit. This limit changes with technology and with nature. When this limit is reached supply and demand will force us into self destruction where survival of the fittest returns. That is my observation of supply and demand. With such a result and one that can happen in 50 years how will we grow as humans? What is the point of growth if we might destroy ourselves when we peak?

I propose that all resources are divided equally among every person on the planet. These resources are not given away, but there is a max limit to the resources a single person can acquire, a planned division. This limit can be increased, but never decreased. With defined limits it is becomes possible to achieve equality and promotes recycling. These resources belong to that person at that person alone until they die. These resources passed down upon death to the new generation. It can be to their grandson/daughter, great grandson/daughter, or even to a the child of a good friend. Each person will have to prove that they are capable of living alone to gain a limit of land, such as a college degree. Each person can only have one child to their name, so a couple can have two children at most. People die by accident which makes free space. If the parents do not wish to make another child then a person can gain that spot through whatever means society wants to make, lottery is fair, and that person can add another child to their name. This is strategy makes living sustainable and easier as time progresses. Once the limit is hit our society will change from acquiring resources to using them more efficiently and that is the goal. It is also possible for people to pool resource limits together to do whatever they wish. For example space mining, 1000 people build a ship to collect beyond earth resources to raise their limit. They reach their new limit and trade then trade the ship for the raw materials or recycle it. Cities and commercial buildings are built with shared resources. One possible system is that each home unit comes with an inventory of the amount of resources placed in the city. These home units and be traded. For example, in city A the city was built with 20% of the resources in the limit and city B is 15%. It allows for cities to be diverse and can even be 0%. Cities can trade raw materials to ensure people can acquire their limits. City A has an iron mine and city B has an aluminum mine. All manufacturing is done within the city so that only raw materials are transferred. Products are only generated within the city to guarantee recycling capabilities, if the city can make it then the city can unmake it. The only exception would be shared products like the rocket for space mining. This system does not need money since it is resource and labor based. The long term benefit of this system is that it seamlessly integrates mechanized labor. As technology gets more advanced and labor becomes more mechanized, people are loosing their jobs or pay. As a city becomes more mechanized the only consequence is that less work needs to be done, since the labor is not exchanged for money. The carpenter works for the blacksmith and vise versa. If the people choose to pool their resources to work mechanization then work can be completely automated. The key point in this system is that theft becomes pointless since there is no material superiority. Gynocentrism and hypergamy will not be able to function in this system.

 

If you find this to be a great idea then I will continue using it in my project.

[schizoaffectiveParticipant 35]

Ummm… Can someone summarize this? lol

[MKBParticipant 51]

 

Now that I look again after a while, I see that my thoughts are all over the place. I made the mistake of combining the theory with the practice. Since there is some interest, I will rephrase, elaborate, and give my updates.

 

Economics is a system that facilitates the exchange of resources and labor. It is the heart of civilization.

 

There are 10 people, 10 acres of land, 10 pounds of iron, and 5 pounds of tin. My proposition is simple 1 person works for 1 acre of land, 1 pound of iron, and 0.5 pounds of tin. Nothing is given for free you simply work to acquire your share of the planet, no more no less. The value of resources is only determined by the availability of resources. The value of labor is equal. One hour of work is just as valuable of any other hour of work, both people are loosing 1 hour of their life. (I do not know or care if this is original or not. If it is original I will come up with a name for it later.)

 

The free market is an exchange system where people decide the value of resources and labor. This system will inevitably lead to fighting since there are people who think they are better than everyone else and are more valuable. Every person has the same share regardless of status. The biggest objection to this proposition is people want to acquire as much resources as they can, it is instinctual and understandable. If you want such a system then support the one we have right now.

 

The problem with the blind acquisition of resources only shows its head in later generations. Lets say Gen 1 mined all the iron and none of the tin. If one person acquires 2 pounds of iron then the other 9 people will have 8 pounds to split, 0.88 pounds. Gen 2 inherits the iron of Gen 1. The person that inherits 2 pounds of iron has an edge over the rest of the generation without working at all, reason for such an instinct. Let us say a car takes 0.6 pounds of iron at minimum and 0.6 pounds of iron for a solid home (four walls and a roof). Only 1 person will have a car and a solid home. The other 9 people will need a car to compete so they will have to take the iron out of their home, 0.28 pounds is only enough for a roof. This applies to money as well since money is a medium for resources and labor. Wealth is not infinite the more wealth you acquire the less becomes available. All your hard work will not make iron appear out of thin air. This the reason why poverty exists.

 

While the nine people struggle to stay competitive one person will have no hardships. One person has a solid home and does not get sick while the rest lose time and energy. If there was no government it would be obvious that the other nine people will kill the person with 2 pounds of iron and increase their availability. What does the person with 2 pounds of iron do? The person with two pounds of iron invests 0.8 pounds of his iron two hire four people. With the fighting force equal the person with 2 pounds is safe and the other four have improved lifestyles. Now Gen 2 discovers how to mine tin and begins to acquire it. Now 5 people have a significant advantage over the other five. If the son is like the father he can now acquire tin at a rate impossible for the rest. It is very likely that the 5+ (wealthy) will acquire the majority, 4.5 pounds, of the tin leaving very little for the 5-. Lets say tin makes superior weapons, now the 5+ can dominate the 5- and take the little that have. Once the 5- have been stripped to the bone the 5+ can only acquire more wealth from themselves. In no time there will be 2+, 3, and 5-. In the end the free market is no different from survival of the fittest.

 

The goal of any species is to reproduce and continue its existence. Since women are the limiting factor of reproduction they can circumvent competing by becoming a resource. This circumvention is the source of gynocentrism. Women benefit in many ways by making such a trade. Mainly they do not have to compete and second they achieve their goal of reproduction. When reproducing any animal whether male or female, will choose the a mate that is doing the domination for multiple obvious reasons.

 

If this primal blind acquisition of resources is the source of and hypergamy and the females avoidance of competition to acquire those resources is the source of gynocentrism. The solution becomes simple, do not blindly acquire resources and do not play into a woman’s game of being one of those resources (say no to strip clubs). The purpose of competition is for developing stronger children under natures guidance. I think the purpose of civilization is to raise stronger and healthier children without the guidance of nature.

 

I simply do not want to live like an animal. Creativity and technology have made such a way of life obsolete. That is why men have grown tired of hypergamy and gynocentrism. Hope this helps and happy thinking.

 

[flightspaceSpectator 207]

i think the ship you propose can actually be a real ship. Or rather, a seastead. i predict the MGTOWS will be the first to join the seasteads, and be the founding fathers of a new society that paves the way for the rest of the free world to follow suit when they see that it works. even before MGTOW i knew this was the answer

[Author]

Posts