Is this man deluded or a visionary?

This Nelson mayoral hopeful won’t get elected, but is he making sense?

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • ConwayCaptain

    We are strangled by BIG Govt, BIG Unions etc.
    If the Govt went back to its CORE.
    Defence, Law and Order and the outline regulations for Education, Health, Industry and land development we could blossom.
    We have too many people who went to school, went to uni?? and then got into a safe job at the National or Local Govt level and are little Hitlers.

    • Polish Pride

      “If the Govt went back to its CORE.
      Defence, Law and Order and the outline regulations for Education, Health, Industry and land development we could blossom.”

      Perhaps…. but it would still be a very poor and sad halfway house compared to what Richard Osmaston is talking about.
      The Resource Based Economy would see society move forward in leaps and bounds.

  • Rory
    • Polish Pride

      No actually he’s bang on and a couple of steps ahead of you. He’s talking about the next advancement that civilization could and should make. Money, originally a mechanism for exchange as your cute little video describes has unfortunately become a barrier that is holding society back. Like he is saying through science technology and changing the way we do things we can easily provide the needs and wants of everyone in societies the entire world over.
      So in answer to the original question he’s definitely visionary (out of those two options) and many many more people are starting to agree with this way of thinking.

      • Arran Hunt

        He starts out with a massive assumption that people will continue to work for society. This is the foundation of socialism and is why it continually fails as it gives the average person way to much credit.

        In theory it works, but we don’t live in theory. In reality he is a crackpot.

        • Polish Pride

          you have misunderstood what he is talking about. the vast majority of jobs would be automated. Don’t think its possible? I’ve spent 20 years automating roles in both the public and private sector.

          Now think of every single finance job including all those in the banking sector. These are no longer needed.

          If we shifted to an RBE you’d probably have to work 2-3 days per week and if you got the work done you go home.

          They aren’t working for nothing either they are working for a system designed to provide for the needs and wants of every single person and the system does this without having to take from someone else like both L and R wing policies do now under the current system. Under the new system they have far more freedom and they have access to whatever they want and need. That’s not working for nothing.

          Lastly the system he is talking about is the most natural one for mankind and can be proven via systems analysis and Maslows hierarchy of needs.
          two things to consider working for society would come in many forms, many people would be able to choose to work at something they are passionate about. Many other roles would be automated. You’d easily find enough people to do the remaining roles.
          What would you do in such a system? Just sit on the couch all day and watch movies?? You’d be bored shitless in no time.

  • James Growley

    The rat faced Kelly should force her minion unions to bring their accounts and financial reporting up to date with audited and transparent accounts before she comments on anyone else’s financial matters.

  • meow

    He’s deluded and contradicts himself a couple of times. How can you have prosperity if you eliminate the monetary system? What is the point of having mass manufacturing and massive technological gains if you have no consumption?

    • Polish Pride

      by not tying prosperity to money. By putting in place a system that works mankind rather than mankind having to work for it as is done under the current system.

      “What is the point of having mass manufacturing and massive technological gains if you have no consumption?”
      You still have consumption under RBE. People still have needs and wants and thus you still have consumption.. A Resource Based Economy simply fulfills those needs and wants far more efficiently than the current system does.
      See the thing is people don’t actually need money. They need the products and services that under the current system they need money to get. RBE takes out money as the middle man. Money has become a barrier to many people around the world having even their basic needs met. This is despite their being no shortage of resources that would enable those needs to be fulfilled. Remove the money and people can have pretty much whatever they want and hence prosperity.

  • Steve (North Shore)

    Osmaston was on ‘The Nation’ this morning. He was also on drugs.
    He is obviously financialy secure, so he can talk about everything being ‘free’ but not with his wealth. NUTBAR ALERT

    • Polish Pride

      He is talking about an entirely different system where his wealth nor anyone elses would matter anymore. Even the very wealthy could have far more under the Resource Based Economy.
      But for many this is a difficult concept to understand because they struggle with the concept of removing money from the system or shifting the focus of the system to free people from having to work in order to survive vs what we have now where working is for most pretty much the only option in order to survive.
      If the world were to shift to this system poverty and war would both finally be a thing of the past.

      • Arran Hunt

        “to free people from having to work in order to survive”. Many people won’t work if there is no personal obligation on them to do so. Even in today’s society we have masses who refuse. If you remove the personal reward for work, effectively giving everyone equal outcomes (Green policy right there) then you will remove an incentive for more not to work. In reality this is Green propaganda with no basis in reality.

        • Polish Pride

          correction – a small percentage won’t work if there is no personal obligation to do so. but then sociopaths exist at a rate of about 5% of society and will actively work against any system just as they do now. See under the current system These non workers exist today and under todays system you have to work twice as long as you would under RBE so that the powers that be can redistribute some of your wealth to others.
          Most people if they saw both systems working would choose to live in an RBE system.
          The personal reward for work does not have to be monetary reward. The reward could very well be having to work for only two or three days each week and having more time to spend with friends and family. But lets put it in a context that will more easily align with your current thinking. There will be resources that not everyone can have and those resources could be accessed by those that either do work for society or have worked for society and worked for as long as is expected (lets say people get to retire at 40.). These people are the ones who get first dibs on New Technology as and when it comes out (which would be far faster than in todays world as money is no longer a barrier) They get access to luxury items, Superyachts, exotic cars, 5 start accommodation, luxury resorts, first class air travel etc etc.
          So there are massive incentives on multiple levels.
          If I gave you the option and all you had to do was work two – three days per week and you had access to whatever you want pretty much, I doubt you’d say “no thanks I’d rather stick with the current system and work every day.

          • Arran Hunt

            So, a reward for working would be not having to work as much. Surely you see the HUGE flaw in your thinking.

            A small percentage? We don’t have a small percentage now. Plus a huge proportion of society see work as a necessary evil. If they could get by without work they would.

            What you are talking about is the purest form of socialism. Which has never, ever, worked because human nature prevents it from working.

            But of course if you bring in the ‘resources’ that only some may have then you are talking about removing money and using the value of other items instead. Which just creates more issues (we use money for convenience). Your whole argument fights itself, first people work for the common good (how socialism works in theory) but then some get resources that others don’t (how socialism works in reality with the haves having everything). You talk about people working so that they don’t have to work (rather than not working in the first place).

            Crackpot ideas that would work in theory. But we don’t live in theory.

          • Polish Pride

            Wrong what I am talking about is the most natural system for mankind and can be proven as such using Maslows Hierarchy of needs. The same thing that also shows how poorly our current system is.

            It’s not socialism. Socialism takes from one group and gives to another. Socialism just like R wing Capitalism are models based on wealth redistribution RBE is not. It simply puts in place a system that works for man rather than man working for it in order to survive as is the case now.

            “So, a reward for working would be not having to work as much. Surely you see the HUGE flaw in your thinking.”

            Coupled with the other benefits and vs the current system there is no flaw at all. Most will actually get to do a job they are passionate about rather than some job they hate but stick at it in order to provide for their family.

            As for human nature preventing it from working ..that’s why much of it is performed using science and computers in order to give the best possible outcomes. This is vs the current system which is a shambles by comparison because of Human Nature. Don’t just look at the theory of Capitalism. Look at the actual world we live in today warts and all. Now pull up Maslows hierarchy and see how well the world is doing. If the system were even just barely adequate we’d at least be meeting the bottom level for everyone, unfortunately we don’t even come within a country mile.

            “But of course if you bring in the ‘resources’ that only some may have then you are talking about removing money and using the value of other items instead. Which just creates more issues (we use money for convenience). Your whole argument fights itself, first people work for the common good (how socialism works in theory) but then some get resources that others don’t (how socialism works in reality with the haves having everything). You talk about people working so that they don’t have to work (rather than not working in the first place).”
            So you have an issue with those still actually having or choosing to work getting access to luxury items. Interesting….
            small correction for you, we used to use money for convenience. In the last 30 years it has become a barrier to us being able to do the things we need to as a society and this problem is only going to get worse.
            Eventually shifting to RBE will be the only option. Well RBE or a move toward Facism. I know what I’d prefer.
            So just to be clear, given your angle I take it you wouldn’t be prepared to work in such a society at least until your role is automated or you are retired at age 40 for arguments sake…
            If you want to look at an argument fighting itself take an honest and open look at capitalism. Not the theory but the reality.

          • Arran Hunt

            The reality of capitalism is working in every OECD country out there.

            Your idea works great in theory. It requires so many things which haven’t been seen, a selflessness that most people don’t have, a belief that most people will go to jobs they enjoy (as opposed to the contra you offer in which they go to jobs they hate to provide for their family. Why would they not find jobs they would enjoy now if such enjoyable jobs exist in the abundance required).

            Perhaps its all of those enjoyable jobs maintaining and cleaning around that “science and computers” that you say will be doing everything.

          • Polish Pride

            “The reality of capitalism is working in every OECD country out there. ”

            I guess that depends on your definition of ‘working’ That in yurn depends on the purpose of the system. i.e. why do we have it what is it there for, who is the system for etc, etc.

            If the answer is for all society then its not working very well at all. If it is for everyone that lives in society, then why do we have a system for mankind that mankind has to work for. That is a very poorly designed system.

            To give an illustrative analogy…..

            Whatever system we have should enable us to get the things we need and want. In the current system in order to do this you have to work to earn money to then be able to pay for what you want.

            Now if the system were your family car, and you need it to get the things you want and need, then the current system is the equivalent of having the car but having to push it everywhere you want to go. After all in the current system each person does the work.

            In a RBE you actually get to drive the car.

            Ok I admit its not a perfect analogy but hopefully you get my point.

            “a belief that most people will go to jobs they enjoy (as opposed to the contra you offer in which they go to jobs they hate to provide for their family. Why would they not find jobs they would enjoy now if such enjoyable jobs exist in the abundance required).”
            This is a good question, with many factors, A lot of it comes down to choices made and debt. The structure of the current system stifles this also.
            example: I worked in IT for 20 years was making 200k per year contracting. I have a mortgage. Lets say I was over it and wanted to become a vet.
            Well that’s 5 years study full time. Who pays the mortgage.
            How do I put food on the table for my family in that time.
            Do I instead continue to work and do it part time which takes 10 years and gives me even less time to spend with my family.
            Under RBE I wouldn’t have that issue.
            But lets say there isn’t an abundance of jobs people want to do…people still get to work far less than they do now in a job they might not be thrilled about and retraining is far easier. Then even more importantly, unpopular jobs would be the first that would be targeted for automation in an RBE and cost to do so is no longer a barrier.
            I’m just happy you’ve given some thought to it. The challenge is lets say for a second you wanted to live in such a world. How would you solve the problems you see without doing away with the key concepts behind RBE.

39%