TOPIC:

I should really fall off this chart somewhere at the bottom, being into Agorism/anarchy. I understand at least on this Earth what freedom is and am taking steps to remove myself from these dumb systems. But off world? That seems to be a whole other ball park.

When I first took this test, I thought I was a political conservative. In a lot of ways I am, I have a Constitutionalist mindset. I have experienced anarchy real world, and found that it creates a power vacuum filled by the biggest warlord. At least the Constitution TRIES to slow that down.

I'm in the Libertarian Left quadrant, basically sitting on top of Gandhi.

I kind of like the old Tribal system of the place is run by the Grammas. That if your Gramma gives up on you, you're outta here. There are bad points to that too, especially when colonizers show up. But that is a different history lesson.

Hmmm, I appear to be more on the left/libertarian side of the spectrum from this test. Make sense, although when I follow US politics, I feel more like a right-wing conservative. I think the questions of the test are not designed to test how you feel about real-world issues, just vague general ideas.

However, I really don't care as much about politics until all the corruption is taken out of it. To me its more like a puppet show than a democracy in the more developed countries. I'm sure that either a very left or a very right government will do OK regardless, if all selfish incentives (like money & power) are taken out of the equation.

I used to be more inclined to anarchistic idea's, except with an emphasis on small self-governing communities. Maybe because it is unlike the one-world-government they are trying set up. However, nowadays I'm more willing to give existing political structures a chance if only we could get rid of the pedophilia and satanists there.

I really resonate with what you're saying about small, self-governing communities. I like to call them Direct Democratic Units (DDUs), and I think they should have a max size of 150 people. If you want to know, 'why 150?' then look up an idea called Dunbar's Number.

I feel that discussing economics is a lot more important than talking about politics. Which ever way the big tip goes, we're no longer going to be able to maintain the late-stage capitalist lifestyle. For an interesting fiction about possible future economies, I like Walkaway by Cory Doctorow. When it comes to an Arts perspective, and I include all the social sciences, history, performing and classical arts with that capital "A," I like to recommend Sacred Economics: Money, Gift, and Society in the Age of Transition by Charles Eisenstein. Then for the engineering algorithms to run it on, I like The New Human Rights Movement: Reinventing the Economy to End Oppression by Peter Joseph.

Any book you want to add to my never ending list of 'things I've been meaning to read'?

At this point, I've come to understand politics as a distraction from the oligarchy behind the curtain running everything through puppets. I no longer buy into that .gov serves 'me' in any significant way.

I am disabled and the various programs I'm eligible for are things I'm grateful for. But I did work in the past and paid into the system over decades before I was hurt. I still contribute to society more than I take.

So economics is really about money being spent, by whom and for what. And who is producing what the money is being spent on. So the biggest issues are: How to keep money in the hands of spenders. How to anticipate what they will want to spend money on. How to keep the flow going.

And my feelings are that this flow would work just as well around creating items we actually need as it currently does around items they want to sell us.

The big message I took away from the Charles Eisenstien book was, money is a social fiction. The rules for how money functions were set up before humans discovered algebra, so we had no way to understand the long-term implications of the monetary system, particularly the effects of compound interest.
However, since money is a fiction we can collectively choose to change the rules. As I'm sure most of you know, our current system runs on a currency that is backed by nothing of material value, can be created out of thin air by a privately owned organization, is then sold to our banks and government with an amount of debt greater than the value of the currency itself. That's all before the banks start their fractional reserve process of turning each dollar they receive into $9.00 of debt.

I propose 3 types of currency that we should use as replacements for the currently meaningless $ point system. In my proposal the global currency is personal information. Each person is entitled to control of their own information. Any government, scientist or other organization who wants access to an individual's data must compensate the individual with information credits. If someone has a rare genetic mutation they could be set for life, just by being willing to share their genetic code. If someone is a bellwether for local fashion trends, then they should be able to command a premium price for their shopping metadata. In order to safe guard this information currency it will require a large bureaucracy, employing a lot of people as information advocates. There is a high potential for technological unemployment with some parts of my proposal, so I feel it is important to describe the new types of meaningful work that people can engage with in my system.

The second level of my proposal is at the regional level, and is based on material resources. At this point I'd like to throw away all the current political boundaries, and describe economic regions based on watersheds. Each resident of a region, as a current steward of the local environmental resources, would be due a share of resource credits, based on what can be sustainably be extracted from the regional environment. Some regions would be based mostly on how much water they could safely export others would focus on mineral wealth and rare earths. These credits, since they represent environmental extractions of a given year, would devalue overtime. This way no one would be willing to sit on huge piles of resource credits waiting for the market to shift so they could get rich. It would even be profitable to lend with no interest in this system, because if you saved 100 credits then next year they might only be worth 75 credits, but if you lent them out then you get 100 credits back.

The local currency, within DDUs and among neighboring DDUs, would be time. I don't know if you've ever heard of a Time Bank. Some communities used them to exchange locally available services during the great recession. Ideally a persons membership in a DDU should come with housing and food security, and be payable with no more than 10 hours a week of work in the community.

A true resource based economy is supposed to operate without any currency at all, but I don't think that radical a change is going to be possible with the current state of the populous. The system of resource based currencies I propose, Information Credits, Regional Resource Credits, and Labor Time, would realign economic actors, so they couldn't ignore burdens on individuals or the environment.