Penistone999 Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 What is money? We can use alternative currency, better currency. Currently doing so would be illegal. Unemployment and poverty continue to persist and recently rocket. Do you advocate going back to the dark ages and bartering. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lab-rat Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 What is money? We can use alternative currency, better currency. Currently doing so would be illegal. Unemployment and poverty continue to persist and recently rocket. Are you talking about setting up gulags or workhouses? Working for your keep or whatever they dressed it up as? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 13, 2013 Author Share Posted January 13, 2013 Do you advocate going back to the dark ages and bartering. ? I barter now? Quite often. I'd be more inclined to have free banking. For you see. £sterling ain't a UK wide currency. It is London centric. And whilst used for business widely down South, it isn't elsewhere. Townships and city's (and other communal land owning organisations) should have some freedom to issue their own currencies to fund infrastructure and what not. These currencies could be used to pay local taxes, and anybody paying local taxes would join the communal land owning organisation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 You've lost me you've got one payment of money.....which surely can't service two bills at once. If a person needs a place to live surely that money has to go to pay to finance that rather than a building project that you can't ask someone to live in until it's complete? Successive governments & local councils scrapping over conflicting political agendas have meant money has been siphoned off where it should have been spent on stuff like council houses & road maintenance. Using your theory if we don't pay out benefits to unemployed we can use this money to repair the road surfaces & infrastructure which will attract inward investment creating jobs meaning people may not have to claim benefits.......................if only it was that simple? Construction companied build houses and then sell them, at which point they are ready to be occupied, so if I wanted one I wouldn't start paying for it until it was built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 13, 2013 Author Share Posted January 13, 2013 Are you talking about setting up gulags or workhouses? Working for your keep or whatever they dressed it up as? It would be voluntary. People could volunteer to work for labour certificates in an area. These could be used to pay local taxes in an area. People of the area would thus accept the local currency. Trade would be driven, work would be done, progress would be made and time would pass. The situation of the peoples would be FREE to improve, by people working voluntarily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gym_rat Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20996278 As the amount of people forced into the private rented sector grows, and the new class of property less peoples expands rapidly, along with the boom in wealthy land and property owners, greater inequalities in our society are coming apparent. 3.6 million people are essentially being forced to subsidise already wealthy property owners or speculative parasitic mortgage debt junkie spivs (buy to letters) and in turn the banks. Instead of being able to build or access some property for themselves. With little security of tenure, depressed incomes and spending power due to high rents, these people are finding it tough. Unable to save, or start a family, these peoples must spend all their money buying their landlords houses or subsiding the silver spoon brigade's lavish lifestyles. It no longer matters how hard children try at school, or how hard they work. Their life is determined by the property they inherit, and if there ain't any for you to inherit, you best get used to being poor, because social mobility went out of the window with jobs for life, job security and wages high enough to pay the rent on a slave box. The are now more private rented houses than council houses. We have gone back 50 years. The coming generations are screwed. The burden of rent is literally destroying out society. It is destroying trade, business, relationships and even putting off working couples from having kids - because, get this, they can't chuffing afford it! And it ain't because wages are too low, it is because the rent is too darn high! except - it`s not actually like that in real life, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 13, 2013 Author Share Posted January 13, 2013 Construction companied build houses and then sell them, at which point they are ready to be occupied, so if I wanted one I wouldn't start paying for it until it was built. I'd be quite happy to fund the building of a house upon a FREE-PLOT of communal land, however, such land must be taxed, but that would only be fair, to pay your fair share unto the community for the land you use. Some small similarities with council tax. (But this would be a proper property tax, not a poll tax). Building would cost far far less than buying. ---------- Post added 13-01-2013 at 20:22 ---------- except - it`s not actually like that in real life, is it? What isn't? Please expand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkey104 Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 I have to say, if chemist has no other uses, he does make me laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.