What if everything were free? Think about it for a minute. Food, education, housing, transport, all free.

Author Colin Turner has come up with an idea called The Free World Charter. He was heavily influenced by Jacque Fresco of the Venus Project who was likely influenced by many others. The idea is not new but it has never been tried before in any developed country in the last 5,000 years of recorded history.

If you would like to live in such a world please say so here. If you can not see it happening for whatever reason, please read this page of FAQs before posting here. And if you have a question or argument not on that page, try to come up with possible solutions.

We have lived in a world with great restriction for a long time. If you do not have the money to do something you can not do it. Making everything free would greatly increase our freedom.

The more advanced technology gets the more this is possible. Robots and automation will keep on increasing unemployment. Rather than have UBI (basic income) why not have UBS (basic services) where basic services are free. Eventually we could have everything free with intelligent management of resources and automation and things such as elimination of finance and surplus admin jobs.

* Before posting please watch the 6 minute video below and read the link here *

FAQs and common criticism – http://freeworldcharter.org/en/faqs

An Introduction to The Free World Charter – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvDKTRgoSS8

Sorry, that's just stupid!

Even if the essentials are all free, there are always going to be desirable things in short supply. For example there isn't enough harbourside land to enable everyone who wants a free harbourside mansion to get one! Some sort of monetary system is the best way to allocate nonesential scarce resources.

Rather than trying to make everything free, a far better aim would be to ensure a good standard of living would not depend on money.

I don't really have the patience to pick this thing to bits.
There are just so many flaws in the assumptions that it could fix societies problems; but I can see how it would appeal to some 'useful idiots'.

Some of the issues society faces that was put forward in the selling of this plan are worthy of further discussion and of finding solutions, but this plan does not stipulate the solutions, it just seeks to plant a seed that there is a need to tear down the established order.

One noticeable irony is that the author purports to sell you this idea of a 'free world' but the first thing he does is stipulate rules for which people should conduct themselves in responding to this thread topic.

Talk about a bloody Nazi, he's not selling a free world at all.
I bet there's going to be more rules coming.

There are a couple of parts mentioned on the site which caught my eye and for which I'm going to have to string him up for.

Under the heading 'OK, but how do we get from 'here' to 'there'?' in the FAQ section:

"There are so many variables regarding what specific changes in society would actually precipitate such a massive shift in global operations, that speculating how it might unfold is almost pointless. The only thing we can say for certain is that it WILL happen when enough people want it.

Spreading the word about a free world will not lead us to a transition, spreading the word IS the transition. We are already in it. All we need is a sufficient will of the people to bring about the necessary changes. A figure as low as 1% of the world's population may even be enough to start an unstoppable chain-reaction, but how it actually unfolds is anyone's guess!"

[Cont.]

- Ok so lets look at your plan.

You want to MOBILISE 1% of the population to believe in policies you've yet to stipulate.
To start an 'unstoppable chain reaction' that would impose your ideas upon the other 99% ?
You want a revolution of 'useful idiots'.

You say 'spreading the word IS the transition'
- So in your mind just speading this crap and having people take the time to hear you 'victimhood sales-pitch' and preying on their emotional incontinence undermines the existing order; and is thus a stepping stone towards your utopia.

So you want to ruin my society for pie in the sky bs, that you can't even lay out realistic policies for?
Where's your ethics Mr New World Savior?

Like a heroin dealer you're preying on peoples emotions, misfortunes and poor life choices to sell your agenda.
A stronger willed person wouldn't even waste their time reading your 2-bit website.

You want people to believe you have answers for the world, yet you cant even build a website properly?
Or stipulate your policies and ideas in such a future society you advocate for?

The world I want is one where ideas are won on the basis of merit.
Where's your fine print?
Where's your merit?
All you've done is whinged about the problems and produced a solution a 8year old could come up with, thinking somehow we should listen because you're an adult.

Ultimately, it looks like a eugenics depopulation agenda to me anyway.
Not a plan to build a better, more efficient, more productive, ethical and fairer society.

A pure form of socialism bound to fail from day one is what this proposal is, such things fail because no reason to improve can exist and soon the opposite takes place a dreamers dream that would if we wanted it or not it would take away what makes us drive for better

Yes Belly, in an ideal Communist world there would be no need for money, all would take according to their needs, and not according to their greed. well we are a long way short of this state of Nirvana, are we not?
Many cultures existed for millennia without seeing a need for money, just not ours.

BTW Woolies and Coles are throwing open their doors for the next 24 hours so customers can go in (in an orderly fashion) and take groceries only according to their needs. They have stressed it must be done in an orderly fashion, no rioting, or they wont repeat it next week. LOL

p/s It would be like free beer at the pub! Condolences about the Wonnabes last night. I was in the pub with a couple of Kiwi's, rather painful.

Very few things in history have been free, as most have been acquired using some form of currency.

It doesn't get much battier than this.

Well, I have always wanted my own zeppelin. And a smallish personal menagerie, nothing too elaborate - just a few elephants (African), a giant tortoise, a few bears (various species), some otters and a Komodo dragon to start with. And I've always wanted to live in a castle, but not one of those old draughty ones, I'd want a new one built that still looks the part but has decent insulation. And I've got my eye on a few Dali originals, and...

Although according the FAQ's, greed is supposed to disappear once money is abolished, and if people are still greedy after that it's because they're not appropriately 'educated'. So I guess anybody submitting a wish list like mine - or just committing the sin of greed by expressing a desire for stuff that the orchestrators of this brave new world don't think they're entitled to - will have to be re-educated.

I wonder what happens to them if they're still greedy after their re-education?

Look I welcome the author and hope we will see more of him/her but as a trashy lefty, any one left of Trump is considered such by some here, it is plain stupid! as we came out of the caves, and all humanity did, trade was front and center, not giftes, why produce if not for gain? we started to grow food and traded it for cash or kind,communism never ever worked, the nearest it got was Cuba, a country still providing health care for free to other countries

Life without money is healthier and happier, it is how things should ideally be.

Where can we see it happening?

- In tight families.
- In the early days of the Kibbutzim.
- In monasteries.

What are the requisites?

1) The size of the society must be small enough for everyone to know everyone else well.
2) The group must be bonded by some common belief-system and ideals.

Without those, trust is not possible, so money has to replace trust.

The author, however, believes in technology and modern comforts, which require large-scale specialisation and coordination: small groups cannot provide that. Also the chances for a large population to have the same, or even close enough, ideals, is practically zero. Further, with current population numbers, even small groups who are willing to forego modern comforts, no longer have the physical space to survive without modern technology.

What the author wants, is simply a case of eating the cake and having it too.

Until human population is significantly reduced, the best we can aspire for, are small autonomous communities within which common ideals replace money, but who still trade between them. Even this is a big ask and alas, then there is the perennial question of what happens when members no longer share the same ideals.

The Kibbutz was successful and its members happy so long as population was sparse; the technology and comforts were basic; and the common aspirations were still in progress. When that changed, it collapsed.

As of now with a monetary system, people provide a service to get paid, and be able to pay for other survives to live off of or to enjoy. If everything was free that would dramatically change that dynamic. Those who want food, clothing or other goods would depend on the charity of someone providing those poducts, and either growing them or making them. Without money the system is dependent on charity without any incentive to keep production to supply goods or services high enough to sustain the people.

Not that it can't be done. I don't know if it can be done or what that would look like if it was. As of now though, I don't see the infrastructure in any society to maintain it.

Its true many people survive in the world without money. When I was a kid I'd ask the Old Man for a "couple of bob" to go to the flicks, he'd say "For Christ sake son, I've got no dosh!" I survived without money! Did't go to the flicks either. I think the Old Man without money went to the pub and got pissed!

Ah! the good old days!

I recall my early working days when an old bloke held forth with;

I remember when the tram only cost a PENNY"

And another old wit retorted with; "Yes, Curly, I bloody remember when the tram only cost a penny! And I remember many a frign' day I had to walk, because I didn't have a bloody PENNY to catch it!"

See, lots of people survived without money.

I sometimes ask myself, how good were the good old days.(without money)

Deeply honestly earnestly I want a more caring world, a safety net for every one unable to fend for themselves even a tax every one world, to fund the giving, but it remains true the world without cash works only for ants/Bee,s and those insects that live and die for the sake of the whole,humanity will never be even close to that degree of lack of self interests

What if everything was free?

Our world is made up of many different racial, ethnic,
religious, and regional traditions. Societies have
different values - some are highly competitive and
place great value on the achievement of power,
wealth, and prestige. Others value regular,
disciplined work for its own sake, and those who don't
work are considered lazy and even immoral.

Some people tend to be moralists, seeing the world in terms
of right and wrong and constantly evaluating the moral
behaviour of others. Whilst others are humanitarians -
regarding themselves as a kindly, charitable people,
always ready to come to the aid of the less fortunate or the
under-dog.

Many people believe that problems have solutions, and they are
intensely practical people - for them the ability to "get
things done" is widely admired.

Others look to the future than the past, sharing convictions
that things can and should get better, their outlook is
fundamentally optimistic.

We also have people who value the "good life" which they
define in terms of a high standard of living and the
possession of material goods.

Then we have people who believe in equality - especially
equality of opportunity. Freedom of the individual is regarded
as one of the most important values for some people.
However there's also people who despite their belief in
"rugged individualism" tend to be conformists and are
suspicious of those who are not.

The list goes on from - national patriotism individual
personalities to belief in democracies and so on.
The point being made is that every society will need some
system of social control - a set of means of ensuring that
people generally behave in expected and approved ways.
Therefore - everything cannot be free in all societies.
Each society is different - what is acceptable in one society
may not be acceptable in another - depending on their values
and ideas about what's good, right, and desirable.

One of the Q's in the FAQ gives the game away...

"Everything is free? Great! I'll have 100 grand pianos please!

Firstly, and assuming somone had a genuine reason for needing 100 grand pianos, an appropriate level of education and responsibility towards nature would prevent most people from making such a request, due to the heavy drain on natural resources and human skills that fulfilling such an order would require.

Even so, if such a request was genuine for whatever reason, there's no reason why it shouldn't be fulfilled providing it is physically possible to do, and the person making the request accepts the length of time it would undoubtedly take to complete."

Note: someone has to "request" the pianos. Make the request to whom? A distribution committee? Some ministry? Skynet?
The 'request' will be granted if its "genuine". And who decides that?
This examples applies to 100 pianos. But what about the extra rasher of bacon over what is genuinely needed as decided by the charter controllers? Or the new pair of shoes?

In the end there has to be some sort of method to reconcile unlimited demands with limited resources. Capitalism uses money as that method. Communism used committees and 5 yr plans.

There's an old saying that in a capitalist system the rich become powerful while in a communist system the powerful become rich (eg Putin, Castro). There will still be want and there will still be poverty among those who have to do the requesting. But those deciding on the genuineness of the request won't be poor or left wanting.

And I'm bloody certain that those who push this idiocy are convinced they'll be the requestees not the requestors.

Ominously their system already calls for the people to be re-educated so as to manage their 'requests'. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of the various communist systems over the past century will know where re-education leads. Gulag anyone?

Fictionally there was a society where all wants were met for free and no one had to work to met their needs. They were called the 'Eloi'. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eloi

mhaze not so free in that world the elo looked more like chickens being fattened for the day they indeed paid for their food, it would take such a world for this scheme to work

In an ideal world more than half the posters would not be commenting here.

And which half are you in, individual?

//In an ideal world more than half the posters would not be commenting here.//

What was it you were saying the other day about it being the lefties in favour of silencing people they disagree with, mhaze?

Straight from the horse's mouth. I love Tories :)

huh?

Toni, the quote you're complaining about wasn't from me. I was mocking his/her claim that others should be silenced or at least remain silent.

Another (yet another!!) example of someone seeing what they want to see rather than what's actually there.

indy a few words, let us get out of hearing range of the others ok? now lets see, why do you think GY started this page? and why do you think we bottom feeders stay away, mostly, from the top part of the page? think with me on this if you ran the place would you want more traffic? more points of view? or would you only want those who shared your view? looking for a page full of cranky old unfocused Trump fans, even in America will be a long wait,sadly the government gets about 37 percent of the first vote, Labor 33 or 34 percent,what do we do with the retchs who vote other ways? drown them, or face the truth we just have to live with them comrade

Belly,
I appreciate the opportunity of being able to get my opinon out there by the forum provided by GY.

In the real world, goods are produced and services are provided: i.e. people work to get goods and services to buyers and consumers. Factories and production centre need input materials transported there by drivers. Retail outlets for goods need transporters too. Goods and services need advertising so people know they exist and where to access them. So media workers as well. Schools need teachers, maintenance workers, etc. And on and on.

Marx pointed out that goods aren't produced out of thin air by fairies (not his actual words). They are produced by capitalists to improve their money-capital-money cycle (contributing capital) and by labourers (contributing labour) who expect a wage. i.e. people work to produce goods that small children believe come free.

It seems some of those small children carry their infantile fantasies into adult life - that goods and services are provided by 'someone' for free. I remember my young son wanting to post a letter on a Saturday night and asking to go down to the newsagent's for a stamp, on the assumption that he/she/it was always there, 24/7.

On the other hand, some of us in the real world are only too aware that, in order to get a fraction of what we may produce, we may have to carry many, many others, such as management, shareholders, a plethora of government regulatory agencies, and a wide assortment of parasites. Some of us just shrug and say, that's how it is, and the gender the schemes, the more layers of BS artists and assorted parasites.

As an ex-Marxist, it took me a very long time to realise that a 'socialist' society was never going to exist staffed only by Stakhanovites (check that out on Wikipedia, children) - that ever-increasing numbers of apparatchiki and executioners would be necessary to keep the whole ramshackle apparatus going.

[TBC]

[continued]

But, to be charitable, this poor kid is oblivious even of the Stakhanovites - he/she seems to think that, yes, goods and services are produced out of thin air by fairies at night.

I'm puzzled why anyone would want such a work-free life ? What are you going to do all day, watch Channel Nine ? What would be the point of doing anything much, e.g. growing your own vegetables, if they're readily available 'free' ? Perhaps kick a footy around every afternoon, after a late-morning rise ? Go to a free gym, with free instructors ? The odd free trip to Bali ?

And of course, how would one actually earn any money for extras ? No, dear child, money comes, on the whole, from working, and that means working in the production and of goods and the provision of a multitude of services, paid for out of our taxes, usually from our earnings. Earnt from working.

Sorry, kid, there will never be an alternative to working, for most of us, and often getting ripped off in the process. There will never be a Heaven on Earth, no Big Rock-Candy Mountain - Hells, yes, of course, some of us have learnt much from the bitter history of 'socialist' regimes.

But keep believing that you're some sort of unique genius with an amazingly cunning plan that nobody else in history has ever thought of, if that makes you feel better the others.

Joe

Dear Joe,

You made two lists of necessary providers of goods and services versus the parasites: please move the advertising and media from the first list to the second.

Suffice there be a simple central index of goods and service providers (such as yellow-pages), then those who want to consume something will pull the information. Pushing information is wrong, and while I would stop short of criminalising it, I would at least stop encouraging it by denying tax deductions for advertising expenses.

Much of schooling also belongs in the second list: it is largely about indoctrination as well as training young "gladiators" to fight each other in the cruel capitalist battle-for-jobs.

While there will never be an alternative to working, Heaven on Earth is not binary: we should try to reduce the overall amount of work-for-money, but especially of unnecessary (and at times even harmful) work. Too many of us are wasting the best of our lives in jobs that we know are unethical, abusive and/or unnecessary, but we do it anyway only because we must pay the bills. Had basic/frugal survival not depended on having a job, most jobs on the second list could be eliminated.

Generally shouldn't try to improve on nature. Families, culture, nations important- world bodies should only regulate between nations not within. Every culture should have their own nation and right to self determination. Grand plans end in tears. Small incremental changes are ok with review. Less people and more self sufficient ones are a key to good society. Everything is free => no rules no cost no responsibility => no working.

When there are less people with respect to the environment effectively everything is free. The ones that travelled to the western US could build their cabin where they wanted.