According to some, money is
an amazing tool. Claims are made stating that: money facilitates trade; money helps
organize where the demand for certain things are; money motivates people and
speeds technological and medical advancements. But are these true?
Money facilitates trade:
Yes, that seems true. In the type of society we live in, if I want shoes or a
car, instead of trading it for gum or soda, money facilitates the transaction.
However, this is worth nothing for people who have nothing to trade, whether
it’s money, some other object, service to engage in trade, or for people
who do not even enjoy engaging in the act of trade. Money becomes something
people are forced to use, rather than a voluntary act, as some will claim.
Money organizes where the demand for certain things are: To a limited degree. If something sold out really fast at a local shopping mall, maybe there is a demand for more of that product, so more would be ordered to meet demand. But in locations where poverty reigns, people cannot afford buying much, so even if they have a demand for essential things like healthy food and drinkable water, it will not be sent to them because it would not be profitable. In those cases, humanitarian efforts may be necessary to meet their requirements for survival.
Money motivates people: In limited areas this may be the case, but if everyone had access to the things we need for survival a lot of people would still do the things they love even if they didn’t get compensated for it with money. Artists would keep making art, sport players would keep playing sports, and people who love teaching would continue to be teachers. Here’s an insightful video about “The surprising truth about what motivates us.”
Money speeds technological and medical advancements: What was just said can be applied to here as well. If we all had access to the things we need to survive, people who love technology would be able to participate in helping it advance (the same can be said about medicine). The fact that money is something that everyone needs makes it more of an act of violence, forcing people to make technological advancements - or else you get fired. What is better still is that more people could participate if money was no concern because there wouldn’t be a limited amount of available positions in each job sector, so anyone who wants to help advance technology, medicine, space exploration, and just about anything else, could do it without the pressures of needing money to survive or competing against everyone else to be the best to ensure they don’t get fired (this would also drastically reduce stress, improving mental and physical health).
The problem about money, it seems, is that even though it may have been useful at some point in time (and in certain areas), it doesn’t seem like it permanently solves human problems. Money itself starts to become a cumbersome thing to deal with in society, and seems more like it becomes a method of control and divides societies’ members based on income. Imagine how much larger the gap between the wealthy and the poor will become over time as technology takes over human jobs. Here is an interesting discussion about "robots, unemployment, and basic income".
Money organizes where the demand for certain things are: To a limited degree. If something sold out really fast at a local shopping mall, maybe there is a demand for more of that product, so more would be ordered to meet demand. But in locations where poverty reigns, people cannot afford buying much, so even if they have a demand for essential things like healthy food and drinkable water, it will not be sent to them because it would not be profitable. In those cases, humanitarian efforts may be necessary to meet their requirements for survival.
Money motivates people: In limited areas this may be the case, but if everyone had access to the things we need for survival a lot of people would still do the things they love even if they didn’t get compensated for it with money. Artists would keep making art, sport players would keep playing sports, and people who love teaching would continue to be teachers. Here’s an insightful video about “The surprising truth about what motivates us.”
Money speeds technological and medical advancements: What was just said can be applied to here as well. If we all had access to the things we need to survive, people who love technology would be able to participate in helping it advance (the same can be said about medicine). The fact that money is something that everyone needs makes it more of an act of violence, forcing people to make technological advancements - or else you get fired. What is better still is that more people could participate if money was no concern because there wouldn’t be a limited amount of available positions in each job sector, so anyone who wants to help advance technology, medicine, space exploration, and just about anything else, could do it without the pressures of needing money to survive or competing against everyone else to be the best to ensure they don’t get fired (this would also drastically reduce stress, improving mental and physical health).
The problem about money, it seems, is that even though it may have been useful at some point in time (and in certain areas), it doesn’t seem like it permanently solves human problems. Money itself starts to become a cumbersome thing to deal with in society, and seems more like it becomes a method of control and divides societies’ members based on income. Imagine how much larger the gap between the wealthy and the poor will become over time as technology takes over human jobs. Here is an interesting discussion about "robots, unemployment, and basic income".
These days, discussions of guaranteed/basic income come up from time to time – essentially never from
political leaders, however. This seems like a good idea, but would ideally be
only a temporary patch to the root problem – being that we all have needs
and they need to be addressed if we want a healthy, safe, and educated society.
If money is still embedded in the fabric of society it still leaves the richer
with more than what those with limited income have, continuing a class division
that would still encourage certain crimes, after all even the rich commit
crimes.
The idea of having a world without money may seem “utopian,” but definitely requires work to get there, and even if it is ever achieved it may be unrealistic to think problems would never emerge.
As it stands, based on the increase of our efficiency and technology, it does not seem unrealistic to think that we could live together as a civilized society which works together, for each other, rather than competing on a daily basis for personal gain. And if we are only concerned with taking care of our individual needs, then we are just encouraging more of the same problems we have seen over the last few thousand years – classism, poverty, mental health problems, famine, corruption, and much, much more.
The idea of having a world without money may seem “utopian,” but definitely requires work to get there, and even if it is ever achieved it may be unrealistic to think problems would never emerge.
As it stands, based on the increase of our efficiency and technology, it does not seem unrealistic to think that we could live together as a civilized society which works together, for each other, rather than competing on a daily basis for personal gain. And if we are only concerned with taking care of our individual needs, then we are just encouraging more of the same problems we have seen over the last few thousand years – classism, poverty, mental health problems, famine, corruption, and much, much more.
Fascinating!!!
ReplyDelete