Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Moving into a New Economy

Posted 1 year ago on Jan. 20, 2013, 6:16 a.m. EST by cell81 (29)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Chapter 1 Introduction: I am writing this because I wish to address the economic need of the developed world to shift into a new economy. This need is essential to the global economy because the developed world’s lack of being able to compete in a production base economy. The education and skill set of the developed world is geared towards: services, research & design and consumerism. The talk of moving education towards a modern technological state is not the only move needed. We must also talk about: sustainability, regeneration and other novel entrepreneurial enterprises.
Our world will not survive the type of consumption we are use too. Once, we add on other developing countries, we will most likely see an exponential raise in all sorts of natural abnormalities. This natural reaction to our consumption to resources is something we have to address. The best way for us to address this, I believe, is in a drastic shift in the way we live our lives.
The developed world is more incline for this drastic shift than any other. It has the dynamics necessary to alter its own reality and drive the world’s economic state. The system that is in place must change and the developed world is the only place it can be changed. The developing world is reliant on the industries that are already in place in the developed world. They must stay incline to adopt the systems in place and improve them. While, the developed world improves its own systems and develop innovative ways to stay ahead.
Quality and luxury goods cannot be the only thing that the developed world exports. There will have to be a need for a quality of life that only a developed world can provide. There will have to be need for the character that only a developed world can produce. It must be seen for its wealth in living within proportions and not consumption. Its commitment to serves, quality and understanding cannot be surpassed. Its commitment to a character that is unwilling to relinquish it progresses in: quality of life, established equalities, and other social progress.
It will have to do this so the developing world will keep looking up to it, or it will lose its grandeur. The developing world will look upon the developed world as just a product of happenstance. The hypocrisy of the developed world will allow corruption to gain the higher ground and rule. We will see degradation in all the progress we have made and the only way to survive will be to adopt a lapse in humanity.
Chapter 2 Moving into a Direct Democracy: I will have to state the obvious, that this change will most likely have to lead to a direct democracy. All the technology is in place for such a shift and all that would really be required would be, how to operate it? This will drain the need for self absorption and biases within government. This will require higher forms of character within social and public spheres. We will see a higher global demand for representation in every field. We will see drastic openings and needs for individuals that can think and provide for themselves. It will be closer to creating a universe out of nothing than talking about how someone is not doing something for you.
We have to move away from the idea that our government is here for us and that they must provide for our every need. We cannot think that someone else can solve our problems for us. We have to take on more responsibility and be allowed to it. We have to move towards a way of life that leads towards more freedom. The freedom must be within how we all move. We must be together in like and separate in kind. For example; I am like you but I am the kind of person that will not want to stay like you, if you are for war.
We will have to talk about the peaceful shifts in governments and economics that will allow the world to operate in a desirable way for all. We have to produce the things that a world will really want or need. Otherwise, we are destined to fail.

25 Comments

25 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by Sandy0621 (175) 1 year ago

You have a lot of problems to overcome. For all the complaining people do, a very large majority actually believes the current representative form of government and a regulated form of capitalism works for them.

Before you begin a factual listing all of the flaws in government and capitalism, please note I said "believe". You have to somehow destroy their faith that the system is working for them. The majority are employed, have a home, feel they manage their debt.

It is likely to take a total failure and collapse of the world's economy to shake their faith.

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

I wasn't really trying to say that people were complaining. It was more along the lines of, people needing to address their own dilemmas in a way that gives them more power and responsibility. This is an option - meaning the above essay.

I think that the developed world needs to show the developing world that people can govern themselves in such a way that what is practiced as a higher state of freedom is sublime.

If people "believe" that their current system is good for them. It is very hard to change that faith. I am living in Thailand because I felt that my current system wasn't providing my family and me the things we needed. Living here has opened another state of mind for me. From human trafficking concerns to freedom of speech and other things that people can't even think about 100,000 miles away. The comforts of home don't address what you can lose. There is a real possibility to lose everything they have and more, quicker than they think. You don't have to believe me, I just want to try.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

The beneft of big government is that it provides the advantage of an immense economy of scale. By aggregating the taxes of millions of people and businesses, the government is able to buy things at a price that we wouldn't be able to get for ourselves as individuals.

The key is for the government to make the right investments with this money, that is, investments which benefit all of the people. This means, in particular, investments in the development of the physical economy, such as infrastructure, but in public services as well which are critical to physical development, such as education and healthcare.

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

That is right! So wouldn't more people partaking in government be part of big government? I am not against big government, I want to justify that the right investments would be made by the people directly. This would relinquish the fault of individuals. Taxation and representation will still be a definitive part of government. But control of the government was always meant to fall away from the individual, so was businesses, infrastructure, education and healthcare. We have specialization for a reason, we have to improve and evolve those reasons.

[-] 3 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

One problem with democracy is that the biggest voting block is that of the people who are the least educated. Can these people be relied on to make the best decisions? That's why we have representative democracy, and a republican form of government, as in Plato's Republic, which is based not just on the will of the people, but principles as well.

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

Well, we have to start somewhere and at sometime. If you don't think the developed world is educated enough now, then they will probably never be. If I was given some internet base ballot where my vote was counted towards the way my representative votes, I would use it. Petitions are outdated and cumbersome, give us a governmental resource that is effective. We have all these social websites where I can find out everything about anyone. Allowing a simplified version of communication that is transparent and effective between my representation and me, is not that difficult. So in the end, is representation better in voting for people or is acknowledgment of what their people want in a more ready available sense and making a more clearly justifiable vote better? This has to be left to the people. In Plato's Republic the principles can become perverted. Who really can take better care of you? Yourself or your government.

[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

You may have missed it we already did start I think last week it is here somewhere. I chose to close the recall bank in my brain or I would be more helpful though transfer is being used with much benefit on other things now. A rage against the machine song was involved it has to start sometime, it has to start somewhere so we did.

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

I am not sure what this is about but I like the Rage reference.

[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

We did start then because then it was now and always will be. The place is here also to remain as such. Time always can be this for happy now moments are where and when we so choose to acknowledge the world as Here and Now, place and time or is that across time and space all these lovin' you...

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

its my belief that anarcho-syndical system with a guiding technocratic meritocracy and independent court system as well as an emphasis on localized governance is the best system possible.

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

Well, wouldn't a direct democracy that uses a social system like the ones we can find on the internet be moving towards a technocratic meritocracy state? As for the anarcho-syndical system, I think we need to start with what is already in place and evolve it. I'm not sure what you mean by an independent court system. I do think that a direct democracy that opens in the right direction would venture into localized governance. For example, we saw unions develop so workers could be supported. I think we could see a development in specialized representation. Meaning instead of lobbyist, we could see a lower form of cost to establish the majority's desires, while still taking note of the minority.

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

we live in the new economy. get used to it the jobs are never coming back. ever. actually the developing world is about to feel the impact of robots as robotic manufacturing in america replaces human manufacturing in the developing world. the only question for the elites is whether to entertain us or kill us.

[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

If that were an option I would be long gone. A bigger overseer shall keep us like the grace of God and how? Every which way and then some all is well...

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

Well, I do think 3D printing has some prospects. I also do think that the impact a robotic revolution to the developing world would be a step in the wrong direction. The developing world needs to develop its governments and people, just like the developed world did. They have the right to seek their own identity in a modern world. All government should have their rights to sovereignty. I just think that being a role model for other countries is the most peaceful thing we can do. It would also be the most valuable thing. I would want to buy things from people I like than people I don't like.

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

i don't think you get it. the developing world right or wrong can not be allowed to become like the west.

[-] 0 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

Why not? We see the developing world adopting western or developed world ideas. You can find the same about the west adopting some developing world ideas. It is a cultural exchange.

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

because it will destroy us all.

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

I don't really see why or how, but if you believe so. It is OK.

[-] 0 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Specifically, which of your goals cannot be approached via a road that starts with disconnecting capitalism from democracy?

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

I don't think we can disconnect capitalism from democracy. I think we have to work within the system established and drive characteristic goals worldwide. Technology is one of the easiest things to transfer among cultures and we have to use that to our advantage to seek global peace. Democracy is a form of government that is established that gives the people a voice. That voice tells the government what it wants and the government in turn sells that want to the individual. The individual buys it through taxation, adherence, or some other means. Is that capitalism or democracy?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

we can disconnect capitalism & democracy:
We can do what 80% of Americans say they want
We can do what 1,900,000 Americans signed
We can do what 363 local & state resolutions call for
We can do what 1,309 American mayors endorsed


Virtually every OWS goal –
jobs, taxes, government honesty, energy, environment, economy
all go back to EXACTLY one place
MONEY IN POLITICS

And there is EXACTLY one first step:

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

A constitutional amendment to
Overturn Citizens United and Corporate Personhood

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

▬► http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com ◄▬

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

For a complete analysis of the amendment issue,

and the text of all amendments,
and our comparison of all of the amendments,
and the Citizens United case transcript,
and the Citizens United decision,
and the Buckley decision,
and analysis of corporate personhood,
and analysis of Article III,
and the ABC News poll on CU / CP,
and the PFAW poll on CU / CP,
and 70+ videos on CU / CP from

Chomsky, Hedges, Witchcraft, Reich,
Warren, Lessig, Hartmann, Maher, Sanders, Hightower, etc.

http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com
no password or signup

JOIN our OWS Working Group:
http://nycga.net/groups/restore-democracy

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

I am currently living in Thailand. I don't have MS outlook, but what you are doing is interesting. I wish you the best.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I am always interested in views from other countries
[ pardon me - not your views ]
What do the Ti people think of Obama?
American economic conflicts?
the 1%99% issue the abortion issue? the gun issue? American political parties


[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

Thai people don't really have any views on these things. I wasn't even asked about the Super Storm Sandy. That is where, I am from. I am not trying to say anything bad it is just they are kind of absorbed in their lives here. Thailand is a strange place, where things like this or even within their own country are not really talked about.
I was here for the flooding and they were concern but that was about it. I mean that people don't really talk about many problems here or in another place. Its a no worries kind of place and just deal with whatever comes your way. If you talk about things that seem to be bad to them it is ugly (you may not be liked for it and other things) and so far it almost seems to stop there.
I have only been here for 2 years so that is my shortest and quickest generalization.

[-] 1 points by cell81 (29) 1 year ago

Thank you. I'll look into this.