This will be an ongoing discussion wherein slowly but surely we will dissect the situation around the idea that the machine could be ‘the savior of mankind.’
Within this we have to first look at where we are with the machine as it exists now:
- What is this machine?
- What have we done with this machine?
- How is this machine functioning in our current society?
Here let me give you a story…
About three years ago, one of the neighbors came and we were discussing things in general, he then mentioned an interesting event, a family member tendered for the engine block of one of the new Toyota models that were going to be produced. The specifications of the tender were that the block must last for a warranty period of five years. So in their diligence and commitment to get the tender, they engineered an engine block that would last 8 years. Obviously they were under the impression that if you produce something better than the specifications, your tender will probably receive a more positive view. Fascinatingly enough their tender was rejected, because it did not keep to the specification of a warranty of 5 years.
Now the engine block of a motorcar is engineered, produced and constructed by the machine, but who makes the machine that makes the engine block? That is the human and the human intent.
If we take this now to a broader view of many, many products that are available in stores, we’ll notice that many of them are produced by the machine. But regardless of being produced by the machine (which by the way ensures a greater level of perfection than when it is produced by the human) – in total disregard of this potential perfection, the human would design the machine to produce the goods to only last a limited period of time. This causes massive levels of consumption, placing massive pressure on resources and all in the name of creating a market flow which produces money and profit, which produces – according to our well-drilled brainwashed economists –a market economy that’s necessary to keep the world economy going.
And within this obviously, the competition that exists between the remaining few corporations in this game of monopoly, is to see ‘who can destroy who’ in price wars. It’s an economic war going on and at the end ‘only one shall remain’ – and the one that remains obviously will determine in the end the quality of the product produced. If the consumer has already been conditioned by the fact that nothing else is available but that which has a limited warranty, the corporation can keep producing the same product over and over again, knowing that it will fail within a particular period of time where the consumer will be addicted and adapted to have the product and thus must replace it by their own apparent ‘free choice’ — and so a market force is being created.
Is this really the purpose of ‘the Rise of the Machine’?
What is the machine replacing but the human labor point?
By replacing human labor what we have already seen is that many people lose their jobs and even those that remain employed, end up receiving lower incomes with only the few at the top receiving higher incomes. In this way it is ensured that those that do make the decisions, do not question the system; those that do not make the decisions have no choice, because otherwise they will have no job because of their diminished bargaining power in an economy with high unemployment.
So, a perfect slavery system exists – all in the name of the machine and the machine is blamed for it, instead of the human.
Certainly in a redesigned economy, the machine can play a significant role in perfecting the products available for the human race to use, perfecting the reduction of resources used in the production process, extending the life of the produced product as part of this perfection. Through this, allowing the human to benefit from their placement of the labor resource by ensuring that there is significant and enough basic income for each one to ensure that the product produced can be consumed but for mostly to ensure that the right to life is recognized as a human right, allowing the human to have more free time in which to develop their awareness to become more benevolent, less competitive and self-responsible. Those are the points which should be the outflow of the rise of the machine: a reduction in competition thus a reduction in conflict, a reduction in war and the development of quality production and sustainability, because the principles are understood as what is necessary to have an ecosystem that is effective and supportive in nourishing the human race as a whole. Unfortunately, this is yet to be considered.
You should watch the documentary
The Light Bulb Conspiracy to understand the nature of the problem: the problem is the human being, not the machine. The machine certainly can create and contribute to a society that brings vast levels of freedom to everyone and our society can develop a higher purpose for its existence. At the moment, we’re at the most basic part of our existence where there’s not even a Basic Income, there’s not even a Living Income for everyone! While this could have been possible if this was introduced as the machine was rising but instead, those brutal enough to take advantage of the situation forced a play that caused a massive problem in the world, and now all the top people, the elite in the world has no idea how to practically solve the problem.
So the solution to the problem is not apparent, more radical steps are being considered. I would suggest that the real radical step is to realize that the mistake was made when labor was removed from the equation of the pricing of a product, and it was replaced by the labor of the machine, you cannot compare the two: the machine is actually an extension of human labor and therefore the human should be glorified through it, it found a better way to create more time. But now instead, those that do not fit into the economic model are forced to use all their time to find ways to survive – that is certainly not the way forward.
Living Income Guaranteed, become part of the research. If your objective and your principle is like ours: to find a practical solution that is best for all that works for everyone and you can see that obviously that is the only way we will have a workable solution on earth, then join us. There is no way that an answer on Earth is going to come through an individual, it’s going to require a group, the group as humanity to work together, to bury the hatchet and to forgive each other and to move on and create a system that is best for all – there is no other solution possible. And to simply try and ‘find ways’ that do not involve an outcome that is best for all: is just a waste of time.
This entry was posted in Basic Income Guaranteed, Best for All, Birth Right, Budget, Common Sense, Consumerism, Dignified Living, Economic Change, Economic Efficiency, Economic Growth, Economic Reform, Education, Elite, Equal Life Foundation, Equality, Global Economy, Human Creativity, Human Rights, Integrity, Job Creation, Labor, Machines, Market Forces, Marketing, Planned Obsolescence, Power of Acquisition, Pricing, Production, Profit, Propaganda, Quality Standards, Resources, Science, Self Sustainability, Social Responsibility, Sustainability, Technological Unemployment, Technology, Value and tagged annual income, basic income, capitalism, competition, economic approaches, economic efficiency, economic war, elf, employment, engineering, erradicate poverty, forgiveness, free choice, higher incomes, human labor, job creation, labor, labor value, living income guaranteed, load costs, machines save mankind, market forces, monopoly, new economic model, pay the poor, peak employment, planned obsolecense, product uprade, production, reactivating economy, solutions, Survival, technological unemployment, technology, tender, the lightbulb conspiracy, time, toyota, work.
Now, my perspective is probably going to be quite unique. I was born in Windhoek [Bernard Poolman] growing up in Okahandja, very close to Ontjivero where they did the BIG Pilot Project. Growing up in the community and with the culture and with a unique understanding of the dynamics there, allowed me to see how things really work – let me give my two cents of this project.
The project was based on giving a community a 100 Namibian dollars a month as a basic Income. Now, first point is to understand that Namibian dollars are not American dollars, it is very easy to mistake this point. so to give you at the current exchange rate an estimate, a 100 Namibian dollars = 10 American Dollars approximately, so it is certainly not a Basic Income that is being given, it is not making any significant change, it does not impact the ‘dollar a day’ poverty bracket, it doesn’t even take the person over that. So from the perspective of what a Basic Income should be, this is hardly a ‘Pilot Project,’ it’s more a feel-good project and certainly not something with which one can sway a government to implement a Basic Income Project.
Next, Ontjivero is far out, there are no industries as such, there’s no employment as such, the only thing the people can do there is buy consumer stuff which are very basic survival stuffs, and obviously buy alcohol as that is the foundation of each of the smaller communities, because they have no entertainment, they have nothing else to do and it’s become part of the culture. It is the same culture that is being used by ‘the white man’ so to speak over centuries, keeping the locals busy with a very structured way of alcohol consumption – when they have money, the tendency is to get some more.
The products/ the goods that will come in and those that may start a little business to sell to the community will be buying this in the closest towns which is either Okahandja, but more probably Windhoek because your hyper stores are in Windhoek, Okahandja as a community is really very small – and the goods will be sold as prices that are highly inflated because the consumer base in Ontjivero is very small, so you have to make profit, you have to make quite a profit on every product sold. A 100 Dollars a person extra into the economic scenario will obviously bring a significant increase in spending power from the spending power they had before. So it will look like it is a ‘significant point,’ but one needs to look at what was there before this pittance was added to remind the people of how little they have.
So some will make some more money and there will be more food on the table because the staple foods being mealiemeel which is porridge made from corn, selling approximately at 80 rand (+- 8 us dollars or 6 euros) for a bag of 10 kilograms, which will feed a person, probably for about 10 days with 3 meals a day – obviously who cares that they are eating the same food 3 times a day, which in itself leads to malnutrition – nobody would ever do that in the western world, eating 3 same meals a day for a whole month, but that is what it boils down to, you can buy one staple food that will last for part of the month, and you have to eat the same food every day. And the fact that there is no electricity or running water or toilets or anything relevant to a normal town scenario – that means there are no costs for that, but there are also no benefits of this – would mean that a significant amount of time is spent in preparing food because the person would have to go into the veld to find wood for the fire, they’ll have to go and get water and then they have to cook the food on the fire. Now the pots they cook this food in are iron pots, an iron pot costs in the region of 300 Namibian Dollars, that’s without the transport to get it there – that is if you buy it in town (capital) and obviously the transport from Ontjivero to the closest town is quite expensive because it is a significant way to travel.
To give you an idea, I grew up in a small town where there was no entertainment. To get to the closest movie theatre, was 80 kilometers, to go and do shopping from the whole sellers – because you couldn’t find all the stuff in the small town – was 80 kilometers. So it is a significant point that must be planned well and that is quite costly to bring resources to the town.
Now there was some researcher from Germany writing a negative article about the pilot project and some of his observations only confirm the level of ignorance that exists within the so-called ‘researchers.’ One of his complaints was that the Namibian University was not involved in the research project. To involve a person – or several of them from that university in the project – will cost more than the total money that goes into the pilot project – that should be realized as the first point.
Secondly, the level of Education of the people in an area like that is so insignificant, their capacity so stunted as the current research shows that a person that grows up in poverty will be equal to a person that had a stroke, which would mean that their ability to answer questions – specially from a person not understanding the basic cultural language, even through an interpreter – is not going to get you relevant feedback, because you don’t understand the dynamics that exist within the survival pattern of the particular group of people.
And in Namibia, the basic language for instance there would be like Herero and Afrikaans, as English is not a major language, specially outside the cities to such a degree that when I came to South Africa in 1981, I failed my first year university because I couldn’t speak English, because English was not emphasized – although obviously under the auspices of the ‘United Nations’ and all the wonderful tools with which they pretend to stop poverty, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and stuff like that, the main language has been made English but there has been no significant input to bring about this change, specially where it’s outside the main centers.
So the person is not going to be able to understand the context of the questions and the interpretation of any form of research material will hardly be of any significant value.
Furthermore this researcher claimed that there were no empirical economists to overview the project, so now you want to add another part of the Empireconomists to this whole pile which will increase the cost even more, because this empire – you call them ‘empirical’ I call them ‘Empire-Economists’ because they justify the process of empire – these Empire Economists will cost even more for money that could have gone to the Basic Income Project will now be diverted to the few researches which – whether they’re black or white are in fact actually white, because those blacks that are significantly educated become like white people, because that’s how the brainwashing functions.
So, the research would not have been significant because the statistics used would be to justify why the project can’t work which is exactly what your major organizations like the World Bank and the IMF actually do. Their point is not to find a working model, their point is to justify the model they’re already using and therefore, they’ve already shut down the Basic Income Grant overall because there is no way at the level of the brainwashed Empireconomists where there is any form of understanding that there could be a better system that will involve for instance a Basic Income Grant.
Furthermore this researcher – I don’t know if one can call them ‘researchers’ if they are that ignorant, but let’s attempt to value this point – claimed that in all the years has been ‘no infrastructure development‘. Now tell me, in a community where a bag of mealiemeel is nearly the price of the 100 Namibian Dollar allowance, you want to tell me they have sufficient to buy bricks to do some improvement. Now to give you an idea of what the price is for a brick, the price for a brick before delivery and the delivery will double the price due to the distance – virtually where this is located, the bricks are 5 rand each which is 5 Namibian Dollar Each, which gives you 20 bricks if you take the Basic Income Grant allowance that was received by a person that can buy 20 bricks a month if they don’t eat bricks, they don’t buy food and they accumulate it, it will take them several years to have enough bricks to build an outside toilet, just to satisfy these dear researcher’s peculiar strange conclusion.
So I would not pay much attention to those that claim they are working at some University in some project, doing some form of research that apparently means that they care about what’s going on, they are just being paid with grants, grants that should have been focused on and pulled together for a Basic Income Grant. All these researchers will no longer exist in a Living Income Guaranteed project because there, people will do research because they really care, not because they need the money or they pretend to care. I would not give much attention to how this is all being viewed.
Overall, there would be some change, I mean having money to buy mealiemeel and to have some food where you have virtually no income in a community, certainly is a massive impact, but is it significant that it will actually make a permanent change to the cultural tradition and to the human nature in that area? No, it will not make any significant difference, it will not bring about significant change where the person can make a life changing decision because there is no possibility. This particular Pilot Project is more a project where one will have a look at how effective slavery can exist within the minimum income bracket of the poverty line as accepted. One can call the BIG Project rather a World Bank or an International Monetary Fund Project. Obviously it’s been funded by the church which is some of the significant influencers and supporters of things like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, because the church does not question the suffering and poverty, they in fact ensure that it exists.
So therefore the money that is there is really completely insignificant, the project is insignificant – obviously the people are grateful, they’ve got some ‘more food,’ food that otherwise would not have been there and due to the continuous process of globalization that is even affecting Namibia, there will be less food and less money in this type of communities. But if you guys can continue getting the money to this people, let me tell you: they really need it, it’ll buy them some mealiemeel, they will smile for you, you can take some snaps and publish it all over and tell the world how good you are because you are feeding the starving – they will make a living, they will survive, they will give you the photo opportunity and the public relations opportunity – but don’t fool yourself, your Pilot Project is insignificant and is of no real value. In fact, it only gives an actual overview of the nature of the current Basic Income Grant Project, that the people behind it don’t have a clue what it means to make a difference in a person’s life, it is actually disrespectful to do so little and to blow it out of proportion so much.
So it is important to realize that economics should not be based on statistics, it must be based on fact and another word for fact, the word for Economic Fact is Mathematics and for that you need correct data and then you can work out what is the real situation and what is best.
Now what I suggest to a researcher: if you want to have a model of establishing what would be acceptable in another person’s life: you start with your life and you assess what it takes to have your lifestyle. you do the mathematical data collection and then you start to remove stuff from your life to see at what level you reach the point where your lifestyle is no longer acceptable, and when you get to your threshold, then you have to live that for a significant period, like for instance in the BIG Pilot Project it’s being going on for several years so you have to live at this threshold for several years and then see if it is still acceptable.
From that perspective you can work out exactly what you would be willing to live with as a Basic Income and thus, that is what you propose for everyone else because then you do onto others as you would like to be done onto and thus you give as you would like to receive, and so unless a researcher in economics follows the principle of assessing their own lifestyle and establishing what is acceptable or not within their own life – they have no way except a mathematical way to establish what is valid and what is not.
So at the moment we have no real data all around about establishing an Economic System in the world that is Best for All. The Living Income Guaranteed as we are proposing is coming with suggested data models, how to take data into account and how to adjust the structure of consumerism and thus improve capitalism to bring about a sustainable Basic Income for everyone that qualifies.
So investigate the Living Income Guaranteed – we really care and actually do research.
Google Live Hangouts on this Article:
This entry was posted in Accountability, Administration of Resources, Basic Income Guaranteed, Basic Needs, Best for All, BIG Namibia Project, Birth Right, Budget, Capital, Capitalism, Change the World System, Charity, Class Division, Common Sense, Consumerism, Criticism, Data Sharing, Dignified Living, Economic Change, Economic Efficiency, Economic Growth, Economic Reform, Education, Equal Life Foundation, Equality, Financial Independence, Food and Nutrition, Free Choice, Goods and Services, Happiness, Health Care, Human Rights, Inequality, Inflation, Infrastructure, Law, Minimum Wage, Planned Economy, Planned Obsolescence, Power of Acquisition, Pricing, Production, Profit, Redestribution of Wealth, Self Sustainability, Social Responsibility, Statistics, Sustainability and tagged alcohol, alcohol abuse, basic income, Basic Income Guaranteed, bernardpoolman, BIG, BIG Pilot Project, consumerism, desteni, Empireconomists, equallifefoundation, grant, igmar Osterkamp, insult, lessons from failure, living income guaranteed, Namibia, Okahandja, Ontjivero, pilot project, Poverty, poverty standard, research, Survival, Teamlife.
For the Basic Income Guaranteed to work we require an economic model that must be efficient to follow very specific regulations. Just as one would regulate food and certify it for instance as ‘safe for consumption,’ we have to apply the same principle and certify businesses as ‘safe for the economy’. Within this, one will have to establish ways to ensure that businesses are not built on the ideology of competition but rather on the principle of profit and of quality.
Therefore pricing will have to be certified to be sufficient and effective to ensure the minimum wage at least, is paid to the employees, the business owner makes a profit and the resources bought are paid for at a price that ensures such profit. We have to also ensure that the business is compliant and the movement of sales tax/ value added tax is efficient so that both the government and the Basic Income Guaranteed is effective; and then the consumer will be able to buy from businesses that ensure a good quality product, knowing that they are participating in an economic system that is taking care of each one’s individual dignified living with Basic Income Guaranteed. Doing this will also ensure that things like poverty, debt and the many psychological issues that develop because of stress around money, start to disappear from society.
This also implies that the true supply and demand will be based on quality and preference wherein the necessary research should be done and facilitated before one brings out a new product on the market. This is the part where psychology and public relations also play a role to ensure the person assesses the product as something that they possibly may be interested in acquiring; this ensures you’re not wasting resources on a ‘potentially successful’ product, and instead you secure your investment once you have your market analysis results, an effective presentation of a product that will have an assured market with sufficient demand which you will supply – so it is demand first, then supply.
Thus a clearly defined and estimated market share is established and cross-referenced according to the income levels available. This means assessing whether the available amount of money that is in the consumer’s budget is in fact realistic so that the business can work effectively. This is how one will ensure profit and sustainability instead of investing on opening businesses that are guaranteed to fail, just because the proper research was not done prior to running it. This effective business planning will ensure that sufficient profit is made as well as providing a good rate of success that will satisfy the business and the population in an equal manner: everybody wins!
Equal Life Foundation Research Team
Also on this topic: Basic Income Guaranteed and Business Transparency
This entry was posted in Advertising, Basic Income Guaranteed, Basic Needs, Budget, Businesses, Capital, Capitalism, Change the World System, Competition, Consumerism, Consumption, Economic Change, Economic Efficiency, Economic Growth, Economic Reform, Employment, Equal Life Foundation, Equality, Goods and Services, Government, Industries, Integrity, Job Creation, Marketing, Minimum Wage, Money Supply, Planned Economy, Power of Acquisition, Pricing, Production, Profit, Profit Share, Psychology, Public Relations, Quality Standards, Social Capitalism, Supply and Demand, Taxation, Trade, Trust and tagged business owner, business planning, consumerism, effective economic model, equality, government, income, living income guaranteed, market analysis, market shares, marketing, minimum wage, new economic system, profit, profit making, psychological problems, psychology, quality, sales tax, stress reduction, successful business, supply and demand, value added tax, win-win solution.
The theories about free market suggest that supply and demand determine the price and that apparently there is a ‘market force’ that is determining at the end of the day who will be wealthy and who will be poor. The odds – if you know from playing Monopoly – are that ‘he who has the money will be wealthy because they will get more’. This is happening very effectively with commodity pricing, because the future’s market and the establishment of pricing through this common oddity instead of common sense – for example, determining the price of food this way like in a giant casino – is certainly not a way for any competent government that represents citizens to enable feeding its people.
Take for instance food in a capitalistic world where labor is a capital and your food is a capital, and the seat of your government is a capital and the money you have is a capital: the creation of food and feeding one’s citizens and then making available the surplus in the open markets is the way it should function. Where the establishment of food prices is based on the labor input and the cost input and the historical growth in value through the accumulated effort of the human’s participation on Earth. These are the aspects that must be part of the pricing system to ensure that those people have no need for a Basic Income, because there is sufficient profit for those involved in creating the food to make a decent living, to pay the farm laborers properly so that they can do their work with a loving heart and not because they are forced to do it because they have no other means to make a living.
Imagine! all the people that are into the ideas of ‘consciousness’ for instance, already have this inclination that ‘the hands that touch things have an influence on its constitution’. This would imply that if your food is produced by poor people desperate to make a living that are not getting enough money, constantly experiencing anger, anxiety and fear = that would be transferred to our food and because we accept that as ‘okay,’ we accept the consequence of this form of production as ‘okay’ and as such, we accept the consequence of placing this in our body as ‘okay’ without realizing and understanding how is it that within this we contribute and participate in creating more disease on Earth.
Within the commodities’ markets, food pricing and the giant casino, those that make profits do not care about this because they can create another health product to sell and place on the markets, continuing the cycle of supply and demand which results in forced labor and economic slavery.
With Basic Income Guaranteed we suggest that we start looking at the real science, not only the genetic modification that is attempted to be controlled through patents and influencing the food supply to influence the palate of the population and have control over it and thus control over price. Price control in Basic Income Guaranteed is not a matter of control, it’s a matter of common sense: if the labor part of the food production is not healthy = the food cannot be healthy as the investigation into water crystals by Masaru Emoto indicated – and then it cannot produce a healthy society because the pricing isn’t healthy, the capitalistic system isn’t healthy, there is not enough money moving and your debt will increase! And then, because you are creating the system through a form of conflict, the only way you can then save the system is through conflict. Capitalism throughout time has been proven to ‘need war’ to continue existing and regenerate the economy, to create jobs and to create money for a minority.
Commodity markets and open markets need a new definition where a country produces a particular commodity, it first supplies its own citizens and the surplus – which can be determined as to what is needed in the world, just as it is done with oil – can be sold to all the other countries that need a particular commodity so that they can have access to it on the open market at a price that does not cause poverty and starvation, but that enhances the global economy.
Labor has lost all capital value which means if your labor is worth nothing = you have no power with which to ensure your wellbeing financially, health-wise and in all ways of your own family – and then a country is not able to support its citizens through proper government. And here the capitalist, the wealthy person needs to understand the simplicity of the Basic Income Guaranteed. If you have citizens that have more money to spend and you only have a system that focuses on competition based on pricing, will cause less money to flow. Therefore we propose that competition is based on value, technology and effectiveness.
If one competes on things that are genuinely valuable like a better warranty, better quality product or a unique and innovative product, it is a healthy use of competition that doesn’t cause harm: it enhances the product. But to compete based on price alone, claiming that global prices are going to be ‘good for the citizens’ while the quality of the products is dropping all the time indicates that there’s something really wrong in our reasoning! Because the evidence is very clear that this is not how reality works. The very fact that this is even allowed and not seen as treason because of the way it harms the citizen = that is even more revealing to what extent we are not yet aware of how we have caused our own crisis and demise.
How labor loses capital value with lower commodity pricing and that lower prices create job loss, unemployment and starvation, should be part of our common sensical understanding of the economy. Yet, do you see any of this in the news? Do our journalists actually even comprehend the fact that they are not actually reporting the root and cause of the problems we hear and read about every day? This is a massive problem when we fail to see how it is through our common acceptance of economic inequality that we then accept every single problem and consequential outflow that stems from failing to support every single individual to live in the best possible sustainable manner.
The facts are that if the labor that is put into the production of something like food is not compensated effectively in and through the price, and if the distribution is not compensated and all participants within the creation of the food process are not compensated properly = then we are creating poverty through producing food.
How have we created poverty? We have food at a lower price which means less tax = which means a weaker social service = which means there is not enough money to support all the citizens – this is why we end up with revolutions – Why would we do that deliberately, unless it is that we don’t even understand – after our so called evolution – that we are actually creating the problem with ideologies like a ‘free market forces’ and ‘supply and demand.’
Supply and demand is very simple, it should be based on: What is the supply? Is there enough food for everyone? Which means that the demand is how much we need, what’s the surplus and whether the profit made from it actually supports everyone that is involved in the production process to make a decent living – this is what supply and demand is in a practical civil way. The ways that are currently used are downright counterproductive and detrimental to our global economy.
If you can see within integrity and common sense the problem that we are presenting here, then support a solution that is real: educate yourself, step out of your self-interest and realize that we must work together as one within a democracy to bring about real change.
Equal Life Foundation Research Team
This entry was posted in Accountability, Administration of Resources, Basic Income Guaranteed, Budget, Capital, Capitalism, Change the World System, Citizenship Shareholding, Civil Rights, Competition, Consumption, Democracy, Dignified Living, Economic Change, Economic Growth, Economic Reform, Education, Equal Life Foundation, Equality, Financial Independence, Financial Sector, Food and Nutrition, Global Economy, Health Care, Media, Money Supply, Planned Economy, Politics, Power of Acquisition, Pricing, Production, Profit, Profit Share, Propaganda, Social Capitalism, Supply and Demand, Sustainability, Technology, Trade, Value, War and tagged cheap prices, commodities, corporate democracy, corporate totalitarianism, debt, economic slavery, education fraud, equal life foundation, equality, food market, food prices, forced labor, game theory, healthcare, inequality, LIG, media, monopoly, Poverty, reactivating economy, supply and demand, ubi, war.
Within the Basic Income Guaranteed with a capitalist approach, profit is one of its cornerstones; therefore it must be ensured. Another point that tends to waste extensive money is the point that new businesses are started which then fail.From that perspective it is a suggested that there – like you have with city planning – you have business planning where it is assessed what type of businesses the community can sustain that is possible within the money supply that exists, and that those businesses are then planned-out and offered to the citizen to take on with full support from the business planning section which should be part as a governmental function, a citizen support function ensuring that businesses do not fail.
This will save massive amounts of money which makes Basic Income Guaranteed a very cheap solution to a situation where there is seemingly endless amounts of money ending up in either foreclosure and/or failure and/or abuse and/or maladministration. At this stage there are no actual figures being kept of all of this – we never get to know the real numbers of how much is actually wasted. But there is more wasted through business failure, maladministration, charity and foundation creation abuse due to the influence of the consumer than what is needed to bring about a Basic Income Guaranteed.
You should ask yourself some questions:
- Why are the no clear figures that inform the population of the administration of resources?
- Why are there no figures kept of how much is actually lost through foreclosure?
- How much is actually lost through businesses that are going bankrupt?
- How much is actually lost through people losing their jobs at this stage, unable to participate in the system, unable for instance to pay tax or to buy stuff to increase the revenue streams?
- How much is wasted by corrupt government officials?
- How much is directed toward inappropriate placement of tenders?
These are massive amounts beyond belief; how much is happening because there’s no oversight and everybody participating in the system knows one thing: there are resources being stolen and there is maladministration and corruption, that’s why they don’t want transparency, it’s convenient.
In some countries like South Africa, there’s the prospect of placing in laws to ‘limit transparency,’ which is no different to saying ‘Let’s legalize corruption!’. So the integrity of the human within a Basic Income Guaranteed system should be administrated through a system. We have the technology now to have systems in place that can support the human to the extent of creating a system that is trustworthy and that assists everyone effectively in the world. We have the expertise to do this, now we need the will to stop corruption and to stop abuse. This can be done by Guaranteeing a Basic Income, guaranteeing a minimum wage and guaranteeing profit because all these three foundational stones will actually guarantee the existence and expansion of Capitalism and bring about a high functioning and effective society with the use of technology to produce what will ensure proper usage of resources, technology and human creativity. This cannot happen without a sense of freedom and money does give a sense of freedom.
We have come to the conclusion that trying to establish a society without a way within which the human can express their freedom is simply not going to work. Freedom is in money, it translates as the ability to express yourself in a way where you feel empowered as well as having your Basic Human Rights recognized and dignified. Not having enough money is to disempower people and to force them into crime and as you’ve noticed, massive amounts of money are lost to crime. All these things will stop if we have in place a proper technological system which we can establish with great ease at this stage. We have the technology and the managerial mechanisms to do so. In a matter of a few years, the whole world will be an internet grid and we can make use of all these things to prevent crime and corruption.
Basic Income Guaranteed is not only an opportunity to support yourself from an economic perspective in terms of ensuring everyone’s survival, but also from the economic perspective to have an equal opportunity to support yourself and your family, which is a Basic Human Right. This is the equal right we give to each other to potentially become wealthy individuals while ensuring all resources are made available for everyone equally.
Equal Life Research Team
This entry was posted in Accountability, Administration of Resources, Basic Income Guaranteed, Budget, Businesses, Capital, Capitalism, Change the World System, Competition, Corruption, Criminality, Economic Change, Economic Growth, Education, Equal Life Foundation, Equality, Government, Human Creativity, Human Rights, Integrity, Minimum Wage, Money Supply, Motivation, Redestribution of Wealth, Resource Management, Technology, Trade, Transparency, Trust and tagged administration of resources, bankrupt, business planning, capitalism, corruption, creativity, financial advisory, financial sector, foreclosure, freedom, freedom is money, government, money, profit, resource management, tax evasion, technology, work.
One of the fundamental problems in the world in how crime develops is through tax and tax evasion and for that, specially companies employ lawyers to find loopholes in laws so that they can set up all kinds of foundations and charities with which to evade tax; and with which to influence the markets and the goods available to the consumer, to benefit their own bottom line. Now with Basic Income Guaranteed it is suggested that there is no tax at a personal level and no tax at a corporate level and that one only works with either sales tax or value added tax or, if necessary, with an import duty.
Charities and foundations should be eradicated because they are actually only duplicating the work that should have been done by the government – and the government being the people, the government is not a separate corporation and it is the social arm of the people. Therefore all the work done by charities is actually the work and responsibilities of the government of the citizens, for the citizens. And this duplication exists in order to be able to evade tax, placing governments under pressure to borrow more money, taking vast parts of the budget going towards interest is quite a foolish thing to do because that just makes the government more ineffective.
The most sought after jobs in the world should be those within the government that will require the highest level of expertise with very clear guidelines to ensure that the work delivered at all times is without question the best that can be. After all the foundation of respect between citizens is based on effectively delivering goods and services required to live. This is being hampered by the current methodology where especially profit and tax evasion plays a role and where the services of government are undermined – in many cases deliberately – simply to make profit quickly. This type of behavior which is a form of financial treason, should be outlawed in every way.
And therefore the positioning of accounting services really should be replaced by automation – this implies a universal software that is linked to the banking industry which is under Basic Income Guaranteed which automatically assesses the profit margins and automatically keeps a tap on the income to make sure that the minimum wage is always adhered to, as well as ensuring that nobody can defraud the system. The only reason why there is no transparency at any level when money moves is because there is dishonesty. Absolute transparency means nothing is hidden and one should also apply this within the context of the pricing of goods so that one ensures that when a company is operational, there is enough money moving to ensure everyone gets their wages and that there is sufficient profit for the investors, so that at the end of the day the sales tax and the value added tax are paid effectively. All of that can be automated, removing the human factor that at this stage causes so many problems, because of the temptation that still exists to abuse the use of resources for personal benefit.This will only be stopped in time through education and understanding how peace and harmony depend on our ability to trust one another.
Equal Life Foundation Research Team
This entry was posted in Accountability, Automatization, Banking Industry, Basic Income Guaranteed, Basic Needs, Budget, Cashless Society, Charity, Corruption, Goods and Services, Government, Honor, Law, Minimum Wage, Respect, Self Development, Social Responsibility, Socialism, Taxation, Trade, Transparency, Trust and tagged automatization of accountability, governmental positions, import duty, sales tax, self honor, social responsibility, tax evasion, value added tax, VAT.
This is a more difficult issue because thus far the education systems of the world have only been a drain in the economy and have not really produced anything substantial. One of the latest examples is the South African education system that in the last 10/15 years has eaten up 20% of the budget, but at the university level, there’s only a 15% pass rate with billions being lost in inefficiency.
Education and specifically teaching is also a type of ‘easy job’ because there are no real guidelines or minimum standards, while this is one of the points that build the foundation of a society that can exist without a criteria to measure effectiveness, to apply it and to expect effectiveness.
The current likelihood of drawing people into the education field is purely for having an ‘easier job,’ one where there is no real accountability and that is quite a problem. Therefore in Basic Income Guaranteed we suggest that the teaching profession should be in the category that is normally referred to as one’s vocation. This means that teaching should be in the hierarchy of needs at the level where a person has achieved everything they wanted to be and become in this life, thus they are accomplished and ‘feel the calling’ to educate the children of the future. And they decide to do so not because of money, they do it because of the satisfaction it gives and because they have prepared themselves effectively to be the best that they can be.
We suggest that the teachers should be the best individuals of our society, the living examples that can share with the younger generations how to walk through the path of life with sufficient skills, sufficient understanding of how the world works while standing as an example of what it means to be a self responsible and integral person in society. Therefore money should not be what drives the teaching vocation, because Basic Income Guaranteed would be – in our proposed format –sufficient to make a decent living, which means a teacher should only ever receive the Basic Income Guaranteed and not anything more.This would require one to look at teaching from a different perspective and to investigate the reasons why our education system at this stage seems to be a complete failure.
What must also be emphasized is the importance of the family in the basic education of a child, realizing that in essence: education begins at home. The tools and the mechanisms with which to do this should be available in every home, and every parent should be educated and supported to understand how to facilitate this so that by the time the child reaches school, they follow an integral technological education curriculum that facilitates the correct functioning and learning of the mind, and the structure of the character within the relationships that produce a society that is best for everyone. This is how we can bring about the intellectual development of the human to be able to facilitate and contribute to society through finding more effective ways for the coexistence and harmony that is necessary between humans & humans, and humans & animals and humans & nature.
Another proposal is that if a method can be found to be effective in managing and ensuring that the teachers do produce the children that we can be proud of in our society, such as teachers being subject to performance evaluations and meeting the criteria for effectiveness, then one can revisit this point and possibly pay the teachers at least the minimum wage. However, based on our current evidence, the situation has not improved at all, it has only gone backwards and there is clearly no solution proposed for immediate implementation, and to simply try and ‘motivate the teacher with money’ while the very future of our society is dependent on their effectiveness means such incentive would be in fact counterproductive.
Teaching will be stepping stone to create a society that is genuinely driven to support others to become the best self-sufficient interdependent beings in society, rather than being merely competition driven individuals to make the most profit only – we will finally establish living values that will be the essential structure in which the functionality of our coexistence in self responsibility will be based upon.
Equal Life Foundation Research Team
This entry was posted in Accountability, Basic Income Guaranteed, Basic Needs, Budget, Education, Employment, Environmental Policy, Equal Life Foundation, Equality, Family, Integrity, Job Creation, Mind Technology, Minimum Wage, Parenting, Profit, Psychology, Qualification for Basic Income, Quality Standards, Self Development, Self Sustainability, Skill Development, Social Engineering, Social Responsibility, Technology, Vocation and tagged budget, children, college, Education, education begins at home, effectivity, family, future of the world, graduates, inefficiency, integrity, intellectual dvelopment, living income guaranteed, living values, loss, money driven, professions, profit, school system, teacher's calling, teaching, teaching calling, technological educational curriculum, university, vocation.