Sigh... listing facts is not imagination. Can you read? I used the word 'imagine' not 'list facts'... How will you live without money... you carefully do not address that. You say that we CAN live without money... but not HOW.... that is whereryour imagination comes in... if you have any.[/quote]

considering that none of these things exists that they are indeed not factual I think I have fairly well encaptulated what it would take for money to not exist. Imagining not living without money is fairly easy I will my make my life vastly inconveint and trade goods for everything.

You either dont understand what money is or you dont understand how a society functions. "Money" boils down to being a place holder, I give you corn you give me "money" and then I go exchange it for something else. Lets assume your 90000 thousand years of a money less society (this I actually doubt as a trousim because we were using resources things like flint ect which can very eaisly act as "money" (see above)) the people of those societies intuitivly recognize econmic value. Econmic Value is really what your talking about (if its not you really dont understand money) and has been with us since the beginig of coperation. Basically what I am telling you is that to imagine a world without money is like imagineing pink elephants you can do it, its just naive and about as worthwhile as childrens daydreams

No dumbfuck, written history has been around for 10,000 years civilization has been around for much much longer.

well, if by money you mean cash, mr. cuntbag, i'd go get a job. if by money you mean the abstract concept of giving something you have to get something you need, i'd probably go start planting a vegetable garden, or raiding my next-door-neighbor's land for food.

you know, being a stupid dick and asking lame hypothetical questions is really more for the offtopic discussions forum. you should ask questions here that actually require thinking. i can understand the confusion, since i doubt you even know what that is.

dear unimformed: please do not use this kind of language. When I said civilization: I meant settlements. You carefully have failed to notice that your first criticism was wrong. Will you fail to recognize that all Scientific esimates of settled civilization began around 10-12 thousand years ago? Or will you curse the person who corrects you again?

Dear me... such language: I see I am correct in my assesment of your mentality and character. You think there is a simple answer to everything... instantly

Oh... by the way... believe it or not: cash is money. Money is cash.

And going out to get a job if you live in a world without cash: Is just as stupid as going out to get a job when the abstract concept of money does not exist. What were you thinking? If there is no cash... How did you imagine you were going to be paid? By cheque? What good is a cheque when there is no money to bacjk it up with? Cheques are onlypromissory notes: they promise to pay the bearer in cash on demand.

Far be it for me to correct such a monstrous, huge imagination as yours: but if the abstract concept of money did not exist... everybody else would also be raiding... In fact they might show upat your door. Do you own a gun? If not: oops. So much for your idea. As for 'plant a garden'... Do you know how to grow a garden? What will you do while it is growing? Twiddle your fingers and starve? Where will you find the seed? From your fairy godmother? And where will you find the land? From your ass? And what will stop someone from stealing all of your hear-earned food at harvest time? Or will you stand guard with a gun over your garden for a week, without sleeping?

Wake up. You have not yet begun to use your imagination. Your 'instant' answer mentality is not imagination. It is lack of imagination.

no, your high-and-mighty, cliche'd and pathetically boring thread betrays your utter ignorance as to what imagination means.

cash is different from the idea of money. i thought i made this clear but then again i suppose it takes a little something extra to make you understand even the simplest of statements. money: the idea of giving something to get something else. cash: an item which has no intrinsic value which is arbitrarily agreed to be exchanged in lieu of goods and services for other goods and services.

cash exists for this reason:
person A has enough food, more than enough shelter, and not enough clothing.

person B has more than enough food, not enough shelter, and enough clothing.

person C has not enough food, enough shelter, and more than enough clothing.

without cash, person A would have to first trade his shelter for person B's food, and then the extra food for person C's extra clothing.
with cash, person A can simply give person C the cash, and person C can decide buy whatever they need.
cash becomes more and more convenient the more varied are the needs.

without the idea of exchanging goods and services, person A would become dirty and sick, and probably die. person B would freeze in winter and get pneumonia when it rained. person C would starve. that is, unless each one came to be in possession of what they needed either by their own means or through stealing others' possessions. hopefully that got through your thick skull.

raiding would be no more or less prominent in a world without money than it is in this world. people would agree not to attack others in return for not being attacked. if anyone did attack another, then others would kill the traitor to the pact. that is called society, tard. ever heard of locke? you might as well ammend what you said to, "not constantly fear other people taking advantage of you, in that world or this one? so much for your way of thinking." what a retarded numb-nutted ass.

well, i suppose while you're growing your garden you could scavenge for other sources of food, shelter and clothing. procure the simple necessities of life while at the same time ensuring you can have them at a later point in life. again, your argument can be restated as "why start doing anything, since the results aren't immediate?"

as to where you find the seed, i guess that depends on where you live. if live in a normal residential area, you might have to be creative in deciding what kind of plants you can find to grow. tomatoes are a good bet, and maybe apples. things you can easily find seeds from, in the garbage or at the local shop. and yes, you would steal them from the shop. or find them in the trash somewhere.

and yes, you would have to go looking for land, and then be prepared to defend it, should others try to seize it from you by force. claim your stake, and be prepared to fight others for it. survival, simply put.

and you will have to stop others from stealing your food, just as it is now. well, society will stop them, as john locke's brilliant theory demands. there would be an implicit agreement between equals that there would be no fighting, to preserve both parties' lives.

you could band together with others for protection. and, sadly, before long tribes would emerge again, and the idea of money would come back as tribes begin trading items for others. money is inevitable because it is a good idea.

dear captain morinca: did you know that settlments have been found in Eourpe that date to about 30000-40000bc. Did you know that settlments in Africa date back further. Did you know that humans as a species are most vunerable when traveling so it is likly that the desire to form a settlement has existed for as long as man its no great stretch of imagination. The 10000 mark is the hypthesised time at which farming began.

sadly in the end what is society? is it an agreement between you and the other memembers? Does it go something like this I gain the benfits of the society as long as I subject myself to the rules of that society? Is this not not an exchange of my services for the goods society has to offer? Does that not denote an econmic exchange? Can we live without physical money sure can we live in a society without a system of exchange barter/monetary nope. So toolrak go live in the woods or drink the kooliade

Dear moron, written civilization began 10,000 years ago, before that there were still civilizations, just smaller groups of people who established hunting communities. Take your high faluting bullshit and ram it home faggot.

its ridiculous isnt it? Even the great apes dont migrate they form societies.

They are both systems of economic exchange and thus form the same concept.

You yourself agree. Yet you disagree. Strange. Curious even. Perhaps you strive to confuse??

Whether it be gaily colored paper, pretty little stones, heavy shiny metals, or some other form of materials it comes down to the same thing--- trading one thing for another-- call it barter, currency, food, whatever.

It is exactly the same. There is no difference between a squawking chicken and the shiny coin except the persons who want whichever one.

Wow. Just because the Sumerians and the Babylonians had some "kings" who considered themselves gods does not make every culture surviving then a "god-king" one.
There were other civilizations that did not have kings nor gods really.

You are simply delusional and creating something quite substantial from something quite ethereal. Please continue.

no, dyshade, this thread is self-indulgence and he wants only to see his inane fantasies about uninteresting drivel justified by other people he secretly considers, rightly, more intelligent than himself.

Wrong: read you anthropology: all early civilizations had god-kings. For at least 10,000 years: ALL of them. Until just recently.

Wrong: what you are talking about were nomadic people who had cicular routes and stopped regulary at certain places: they did NOT settle there. Settled civilization began 12-10 thousand years ago. You obviously do not know your anthropology. Many temporary places have been found. The oldest are found in caves. 60-70 thousand years back. Vut those places are tiny exceptions they had no technology: they were hunter-gatherers who found places abundant enough to live until the NATURAL resources were gone. That is not a settled civilization. That is apes sitting on their asses. They were the dumbest, laziest, most unintelligent of all homo sapiens... kinda like you. The intelligent ones were mobile and could adapt to any environment. The dumb ones just sat in one place until they went extinct.

First: you have no imagination: leave this thread since there is nothing you can bring to it except mindless quibbling.

Second: your assumptions come straight out of text books that you were brainwashed with.

Read other books and try to unbrainwash yourself.

Third: none of you assumptions are true.

Fourth: assuming that the only thing that is right is the crap you have swallowed, and regurgitate like a copying machine: that is not how to learn new things, and that is not how to use your imagination.

Fourth: a closed mind like yours is so blind: you are not worth wasting words on.

I am getting sick and tired of asses like you who do not address the thread's basic challenge. if you do not want to take the challenge: please stop whining about how it is impossible to do. It already has been done by many people. So just go away and quibble somewhere else.

All I hear from this forum are idiots saying:

'it can't be done!'

You are all full of shit.

Hey fuck for brains. Mankind has ALWAYS settled into lasting communities. People didnt migrate around until the climates began changing and they had no choice. Even monkeys and apes live in settled communities where they can forage. Pull your head out of your ass.