You can watch it online here: http://video.pbs.org/video/1170821435 It begins, "Imagine a world with no money...."
The hunter gatherers will will begin again if we don't destroy them all. IMHO the present path of our civilization is unsustainable. Population growth and depletion of easy resources as presently practiced is unsustainable and will necessarily make starting over much more difficult. Never forget that we are animals and our propensities run the full range of human behavior. This will be our future unless we morph into Homo Superior which doesn't seem likely. Whatever path that is taken in the future must accept and take into account the full range,out to the fat tails,of human behavior responsibly. No form of governing ever tried is good for everyone. You can take that down to the family group and it is still true. What to do with those that don't fit in has always been the problem.Throw them out and they will probably come back to bite. Imprison them because they wont conform is problematic. Kill them doesn't say much for the society.
the only sustainable lifestyle is the stoneage lifestyle. It worked pretty well for 10k years. This new experiment is rocking baby while the resources last. The new hot item at the farmers market is heirloom tomatoes. Those are plants that have reverted back to their species before they were hybridized. They don't taste better and their yield is substantially lower, but they have better resistance to common ailments.
That would be worse than the current system, which is the same thing that Communism says: that the unit of value is labor. Capitalism has it correct. The problem is that it leaves too many people behind, and it moves increasingly faster changing the needs of corporations at at heartbreak pace in order to have skilled workers in order to be able to compete. Worse, it requires more and more sacrifice from the worker. It is like playing chess against a computer. We have no chance. I want to know what would happen if every person in the entire world had a PhD. We would have no where near enough jobs (even accounting the theoretical economic unemployment sweet spot of 4 or 5%). So in the limit, education cannot be the answer.
yeah, or imagine a world where you can create fiat currency out of thin air. You don't even need trees for it to grow on. The only constraint is inflation. you can learn more about it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AYhl5k_pY8
we have a government by the people for the people,so we are deciding our fate,we have the right,obligation,to elect the right people, vote out every democrat,repub,cockroach,snake,disease rotted politician,and see what happens........ the forementioned have been betting for years that that will never happen..time to ante up
Well said Ammo! It's well past time to throw the bums out of Washington. Politics, like welfare, was never intended to be a career choice!
The fatuous notion that "unfettered and self-correcting" markets, as so stridently advanced by current-generation Republicans has, as any sentient observer can see, been utterly discredited by recent events. The "virtuous" concept of the "Great (capitalist) Moderation" has been utterly discredited, as well. Based on its present destabilizing trajectory, it seems quite likely that capitalism will provoke ever increasing social, economic and environmental crises and, in so doing, fulfill at least one of Marx's principle predictions.; It seems that recent events do NOT discredit the notion that unfettered markets will self-correct. (If indeed that's what is meant by the above.) Only the "unfettered" institutions that were not permitted to fail avoided self-correction. Without massive intervention to prevent "self-correction" they would have failed, as proven by the cases where there was not intervention, and large financial institutions went bankrupt; many banks failed. What is, after all "self-correction" of excesses if not that!!! It seems that the notion is not fatuous at all, but entirely correct, at least based on the example of recent history! That the bankruptcies were, in cases involving the largest institutions, or those institution politically well-positioned, not permitted to occur, in no way invalidates the idea of "self-correction" that the evil Dr. Greenspan was so inordinately fond of. What Dr. Greenspan learned, I hope, was that self-correction, when it arrives, may be an intolerable remedy. Therefore it will have to be prevented, even at at great cost to the innocent. What we should have learned, but obviously didn't, was that self-correction is a hideous way to remedy financial excesses.
I've worked all my life with phd's and if creativity were added into the mix of degree requirements then there would be very few phd's. And you can never have enough creativity because it is rare.