Overblog Suivre ce blog
Editer l'article Administration Créer mon blog
18 juillet 2009 6 18 /07 /juillet /2009 20:13

I guess that, if you read this text, you didn't really understand the french one above (or, maybe you're only curious of how I translated it )

Well, anyway, here it is. (But it's not really a translation, just a rephrasing in english).

In my opinion, things are pretty simple; there is no need to worry much about corruption and all social disfunction, since it's all a derived problem from a basic one, which is a bad commercial exchanging rule. And, therefore, that has to be changed.

Indeed, we have some kind of "obvious" commercial exchange rule, like a seller gets money in the pocket after having given a product to a buyer. It seems to be normal to do it that way, but it isn't. It's just a rule that we accepted (for any reason), and which causes right now all troubles and diseases we may observe all around the world.

Why does it cause troubles ? Because, if one of those actors is much stronger than the other one, the weaker has no chance to win. Even worse, he/she can get so poor that he/she dies.

So, imagine just a minute, some other rule, that makes all problems obsolete.

I propose one: there is no seller anymore. Instead, we need a bank where the product itself has an account (a negativ one), that the buyer has to fill up in order to get the product.

With such transactions, no one can get richer. Consuming would only mean burning money, whereas one has to work to make money. And that's it.

Now, you may ask "how does the product get an account?"

Simply, as soon as a decision is made to "sell" it. Selling only means giving it (it doesn't cost any money). In this new brave world, we don't get richer by selling, only by working.

And your last question would be: "how do you want to implement such a rule?". I can only answer, that one has to wait until this idea appears as an evidence. Then, it will be implemented automatically. I know, one can wait for a long time...

"Each new idea is mocked at first, then, after a couple of time, violently attacked, before it is, after a long time, considered as an evidence". (of course, it can also be ignored, but that's only another way to mock it)

Arthur Schopenhauer.

to read more 

Partager cet article

Repost 0
Published by Dragan Matic - dans What is holocracy
commenter cet article