Related: build, dev, design, grow, IDE, make, plan, produce True development is determined by freedom. A short music video supporting the faulty view that developers (workers) are more important than users: YouTube.com/watch?v=8zEQhhaJsU4 The NWO neoliberals would have us believe Development must be Sustained - that we must always have more work and less output to protect ourselves (the market) from success. So called "housing developers" accidentally build socially vacuous, organically sterile neighborhoods with solar-unaware money pits for the preachers and bankers. A software developer designs computer programs. Koders.com source code search Splint.org secure programming lint bmagic.sf.net bitset manipulation GForge.org >>GForge helps you manage the entire development life cycle Reply to a post at the Progress.org BB Polypoly(TM) conceptions > In the Monopoly game, the $200 for passing go > respesents WAGES, not debt. I think the $200 in Monopoly(R) represents mixture of incomes. But what if we rewrote the game in the spirit of Economic Justice? We could call it Polypoly(TM) -- A Cooperative Community. In this case the $200 might most accurately represent the Community Dividend, though I also think your CD would vary according to the "real output of" the exact Productive Sources you hold a percentage of ownership in. So if you owned 50% of an apple tree you would receive 50% of the output of that tree AFTER the Wages (which can be thought of as a % of the apples) is paid to the workers that had reverse-bid to do the work (plant, tend, harvest, store). > We do not rent > our wages from any banker; Warren is saying that the US Federal Government RENTS the RIGHT to issue money from Private Bankers. Our government (the supposed WE) pays somebody that doesn't even live on the island for the fact that we mint some sort of currency for the purpose of easing trade. Any community has the right to issue it's OWN currency, and the US used to do exactly that, but this is not what We do any more. Do you hear me? The US government does not issue it's OWN currency, they BORROW the RIGHT to issue from Private, offshore banks for no reason other than we have been snookered into it! You may say "but issuing money serves a purpose", to which Warren and I agree, but THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION. The question is: Should the US have the RIGHT to issue their OWN money, or must that RIGHT be RENTED from someone that doesn't even live on the island? Why RENT a RIGHT? Only because those who wrote this law "say so". It doesn't make any sense because THERE IS NO REASON FOR IT except that it has just somehow become so. > we are paid them > in exchange for laboring. Wages should vary according to quantity and quality of work to maximize incentives. >> Yes I know that. That is the money you have to use to pay the interest with. Paying limited interest on debt might be meaningful for Money backed by productive Sources, but that is far from the case with US Federal Reserve Notes. >> We don't formally pay interest, but there is an >> opportunity cost in the rent we could >> otherwise collect (the game simplifies >> procedures). > Let me out it this way: > What if you went to the toy store or hobby shop and purchased a Monopoly game and when you got it home, discoverd that there was no play money supplied to play the game with and you went back to the store and they told you that you had to borrow the official monopoly money from them, at daily interest, and if you did not do that, you could not play the Monopoly game without using the official money supplied by the game company? This is a gem worth polishing. Even if Monopoly(R) were a perfect reflection of our current situation (it is currently too simple to do that), it would still need to be "escaped" to explain the Federal Reserve because the Federal Reserve is an UNNECESSARY burden that serves no purpose except as a trick that enriches external bankers. The only way to correctly represent these international banks that LOAN "the ability to issue" to the US would be to have ANOTHER bank sitting off the board that received RENT each round for ALLOWING the players to play the game. That external bank would not need to hold any of the normal Monopoly Money, but may hold some ornamental metals or some of it's own currency for it's own purposes. The Federal Reserve is a negative-value arrangement that is outside the context of a 'minimal' game system. Let's say you started a community and issued your OWN Community Currency. The currency is immediately available in electronic form once it has been officially issued. Let's say everything is going dandy until, one day, on an island named Jekyll, I conspire with some of your community officials to make an arrangement where the community would begin paying ME interest on every Note you issue from here on out. Do you think your community officials could be bribed into passing such legislation within the community council even though it is a direct violation of the community charter (The US Constitution forbids the situation we suffer)?