I had a very interesting and challenging discussion online last night about money after posting a Tedx talk about giving everyone a basic stipend to live on. It brought me back to my beliefs on money and why I believe what I do. I had to ask myself the deeper questions that I normally don't think about all that often. My bottom line is, I cannot accept the status quo because there is too much pain and suffering that goes along with how the world works at present. Much of this pain and suffering involves money in some way. It doesn't have to be that way. If we changed our perceptions about how money works and is supposed to work, I believe we could eradicate much of the pain and suffering that has plagued us. It is time to rethink money!
At present, money is not used as a way to measure assets. Money is an asset. In all first and second world countries, money is pretty much required to survive. We use it to pay for our shelter. We use it to buy food. It is required to purchase clothing and laundry soap and entertainments. Here in the United States, they prosecute people who try to get away with living without money. How so, you ask? Look at people who choose to live off the grid, especially those who live in relatively populated areas. They may live on well water instead of tapping into the public water supply. Even worse, they choose to live with no electricity or have their own power supply through alternative means. (*Gasp!*) The "health" department will come in and condemn the property or some such thing for not being properly hooked up to the system!!! It won't even be an issue of cleanliness. Being connected physically to the system pretty much requires you to make money so you can pay those you have to be connected to. (The whole idea behind this is just a short hop from making it illegal to feed the homeless in your community.)
In many first world countries, acquiring money requires DOing. You work this job where you get paid X amount of money. You work this other sort of job and you receive XX amount. I have two problems with this concept. First of all, energy exchange is required in all jobs. You put in your energy and you get back money (which is supposed to be a representation of this energy) Why should certain jobs automatically receive more energy back than other jobs? Does a person really expend that much more energy DOing the higher paying jobs?
My second problem with money as DOing is that some people in this world are born without the ability to DO anything. There are people who live their entire lives in a vegetative state and must be cared for their entire lives. Then there are people who are limited in what they can do because of disability or disease (or ironically even because of poverty). These people have at least some ability to DO, but with our current value system it is often considered not very worthwhile.
This second issue comes with its own built in problems. When you believe DOing is important, you can justify the expense it takes to pay to support someone in a vegetative state. They obviously cannot do anything for themselves. It makes you feel good that you are contributing to their welfare since they can't DO for themselves. It's those others that don't DO what they could DO for themselves that get your anger up!!! Why should I be required to pay for someone by my DOing (by my energy) that those people should be DOing (exerting their own energy) for themselves? This is exactly where all the arguments for and against social welfare programs come in. Where do we draw the line at what is necessary and what is just waste?
For me, this sort of thinking does not really align with our modern, technologically advanced world. We have the resources to produce enough food for everyone on the planet (regardless of what you have been told to the contrary). We have the ability to eradicate poverty from the face of the earth--with minimal human output! Sure there are still people needed to produce food, clothing, buildings, entertainments, etc. If we have to be so focused on DOing, why can't three or four people DO what would now be considered one job and still get paid a living wage?
My preference (if we have to use money at all), would be to pay people for BEing. The difference here is that all human life is considered valuable, regardless of what they can actually DO! What is the value of BEing in a vegetative state? Maybe it's to teach someone else compassion, or patience, or unconditional love. In many ways, we all contribute to the planet just by holding our energy. (That's pretty much the definition of BEing.)
The irony of BEing is, most of us who are capable of DOing as well would indeed be DOing!!! Most of us would quickly tire of sitting around on the couch watching tv and eating bonbons all day!!! We'd want to be outside planting flowers or vegetables. We'd want to interact with other people at the store or in a factory. We'd want to sing and play and follow our talents and our dreams! If we didn't have to "earn a living"--if we didn't have to DO--many of us would still contribute our own energy to the world at large.
There is so much pain on the planet. As our voices rise in agony, understand that pain can be our friend. Pain has the ability to bring about change and growth. Understand that the pain will continue until we change ourselves to reflect new ways of BEing. Rethinking money--what it is and how we can use it more productively--is a great place to begin!!!
~CSE
At present, money is not used as a way to measure assets. Money is an asset. In all first and second world countries, money is pretty much required to survive. We use it to pay for our shelter. We use it to buy food. It is required to purchase clothing and laundry soap and entertainments. Here in the United States, they prosecute people who try to get away with living without money. How so, you ask? Look at people who choose to live off the grid, especially those who live in relatively populated areas. They may live on well water instead of tapping into the public water supply. Even worse, they choose to live with no electricity or have their own power supply through alternative means. (*Gasp!*) The "health" department will come in and condemn the property or some such thing for not being properly hooked up to the system!!! It won't even be an issue of cleanliness. Being connected physically to the system pretty much requires you to make money so you can pay those you have to be connected to. (The whole idea behind this is just a short hop from making it illegal to feed the homeless in your community.)
In many first world countries, acquiring money requires DOing. You work this job where you get paid X amount of money. You work this other sort of job and you receive XX amount. I have two problems with this concept. First of all, energy exchange is required in all jobs. You put in your energy and you get back money (which is supposed to be a representation of this energy) Why should certain jobs automatically receive more energy back than other jobs? Does a person really expend that much more energy DOing the higher paying jobs?
My second problem with money as DOing is that some people in this world are born without the ability to DO anything. There are people who live their entire lives in a vegetative state and must be cared for their entire lives. Then there are people who are limited in what they can do because of disability or disease (or ironically even because of poverty). These people have at least some ability to DO, but with our current value system it is often considered not very worthwhile.
This second issue comes with its own built in problems. When you believe DOing is important, you can justify the expense it takes to pay to support someone in a vegetative state. They obviously cannot do anything for themselves. It makes you feel good that you are contributing to their welfare since they can't DO for themselves. It's those others that don't DO what they could DO for themselves that get your anger up!!! Why should I be required to pay for someone by my DOing (by my energy) that those people should be DOing (exerting their own energy) for themselves? This is exactly where all the arguments for and against social welfare programs come in. Where do we draw the line at what is necessary and what is just waste?
For me, this sort of thinking does not really align with our modern, technologically advanced world. We have the resources to produce enough food for everyone on the planet (regardless of what you have been told to the contrary). We have the ability to eradicate poverty from the face of the earth--with minimal human output! Sure there are still people needed to produce food, clothing, buildings, entertainments, etc. If we have to be so focused on DOing, why can't three or four people DO what would now be considered one job and still get paid a living wage?
My preference (if we have to use money at all), would be to pay people for BEing. The difference here is that all human life is considered valuable, regardless of what they can actually DO! What is the value of BEing in a vegetative state? Maybe it's to teach someone else compassion, or patience, or unconditional love. In many ways, we all contribute to the planet just by holding our energy. (That's pretty much the definition of BEing.)
The irony of BEing is, most of us who are capable of DOing as well would indeed be DOing!!! Most of us would quickly tire of sitting around on the couch watching tv and eating bonbons all day!!! We'd want to be outside planting flowers or vegetables. We'd want to interact with other people at the store or in a factory. We'd want to sing and play and follow our talents and our dreams! If we didn't have to "earn a living"--if we didn't have to DO--many of us would still contribute our own energy to the world at large.
There is so much pain on the planet. As our voices rise in agony, understand that pain can be our friend. Pain has the ability to bring about change and growth. Understand that the pain will continue until we change ourselves to reflect new ways of BEing. Rethinking money--what it is and how we can use it more productively--is a great place to begin!!!
~CSE
No comments:
Post a Comment