Assuming the title to be accurate, what is a good way for the working class (90%+ of all humans) to save and succeed in this current environment?

  • xantoxis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    The objection about a “finite planet” is about capitalism, not currency. A 100% communist system can still have fiat currency and function perfectly well, the two aren’t even related.

    It’s capitalism you don’t like, not money.

    • nfh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s a question of the most stable thing to use to mediate value for exchange of goods and services, right? Fiat currency is just the choice of “the state” as a stabilizing force. Certainly it’s better than trusting the scarcity of rare metals, but eventually “just trust the state” will become a problem, and we’ll need to think about rebasing currencies. In theory, computational complexity isn’t a bad choice, but nobody has come up with a solution that actually functions well as a currency.

      But I agree, the finite planet has nothing to do with any failings of fiat currencies, and only makes sense as a failing of the “number must go up” mentality endemic to capitalism.

    • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well the issue here is we’d need full observability of the fiat currency, since how I’ve seen it, no issuing party ever states “there are XYZ units of currency in rotation”. Maybe a not capitalist issuing party would be so transparent?

    • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Communism: A classless, moneyless society, based on the principle of “to each according to their needs, from each according to their ability”.

      • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I think you’re conflating communism and socialism a bit.

        Communism is a classless society where it is “from each according to their ability to each according to their needs”. Moneyless is often mentioned as well, but I don’t think it’s strictly necessary.

        Socialism is a transitional stage on the way to communism, where the working class controls the state (having taken it from the capitalist class’ control), and it is usually described as “from each according to their ability to each according to their labor,” though when they say that I don’t think they really mean that those who can’t perform labor should simply starve.

        • testfactor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t understand why you think that guy was conflating communism and socialism. He claimed communism is moneyless, and in your response you said “neither is moneyless.” What’s being conflated?

          And it’s worth noting that most definitions include, if not expressly the word “moneyless,” clauses about all property being held in common. And if there is no property, then there is equally no money, by definition (as money is simply a system for the valuation and exchange of property).

          • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah you’re right. Sorry, @Prunebutt@slrpnk.net!

            I didn’t say that neither is moneyless, only that I don’t think it’s strictly necessary for a society to be moneyless in order to be considered communist.

              • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                You seem to think that money and capital are one and the same; they are not.

                Do European nations have “a bit of socialism”? Has the working class wrested control of the state from the capitalist class? Have they abolished private ownership of the means of production? No, in fact they’re becoming more and more neoliberal, where the working class has less and less influence on the state.

  • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Realize that all forms of currency are ultimately a grift to allow a class of violent weirdos to claim ownership over the fruits of our labor and that we could actually just share things with each other without commerce

    • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I can see this point, but how else do we store our spent engery? I personally don’t want to be working when I’m 90 and the current only option is I have enough saved up something-that-holds-value long enough that I can pay for food and taxes (assuming I can own land)

      I understand the frustration, but we are sadly dealt these cards and must play or… And there isn’t much another option

      • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        100%. We all play the game because if we don’t we die. The metaphor you see all the time is that the reason were all swimming in this sea of capitalism is because if we don’t we drown. Our participation is not representative of consent I don’t really know what we do in the short and medium term but long term we need to kill capitalism

        • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pubOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          If that’s the case, that is quite the bummer, since although there are 8+ billion of us, most of us don’t want to die fighting capitalism since we at least get fed (or a majority does) and those who love capitalism tend to have large weapons that cause destruction beyond my comprehension

          I had a shower thought recently about how life itself is such an amazing and odd experience, and that’s why we put up with such terrible things, since the alternative is not great

  • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 months ago

    Fiat can work fine on a finite planet, most money doesn’t even take up physical space anymore, just bits in an account ledger database. Ideally in the future governments will make sure their currency is backed or based on labor time, and nothing is technologically preventing that, nor is crypto-currency required for it.

    • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      The issue here is according to the Fed, the stakeholders get a 6% return, which is supposed to outpace inflation. So if the ones closest to the money printer get more every year, while the rest lose money due to inflation eating it, it doesn’t matter if it could theoretically work, it leads to an accumulation to the class system at the top while the lower classes must continually work forever since their savings are worth less every year

  • DontTakeMySky@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    Finding pockets of self sufficiency, or at least ways to prevent falling down to the bottom.

    Universal basic income helps this by making sure everyone has at least enough to live on.

    Homesteading and community gardens help this by making sure you at least have some basic amount of food available to you.

    Building walkable cities helps.this by allowing you to avoid or reduce the expenses of a car.

    Building resilient cities that leverage adaptive reuse help this by making it cheaper to start new small community businesses that keep money local.

    The solutions aren’t in the system of money we choose, it’s in building small sustainable ways to provide for basic needs, even in a small way.

    • SuckMyWang@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m unsure of what a finite planet is referencing? Is op suggesting that economic limits are constrained to finite resources? This doesn’t take into account renewables, human creativity and a whole list of other things. If we create a matrix like environment where the limits can be expanded and create new products in that new environment we can still use fiat.

      • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 months ago

        I don’t know why they’re conflating infinite money with finite resources. The two have no relationship to each other.

      • MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Technically, Planet Earth is huge for us because we cannot use it efficiently or in a reasonable time, and we don’t even have to talk about the sun.

      • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pubOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think we need more restrictions on finances, so our human creativity can effect. What I see is that most advanced civilizations’ largest export is literal trash due to excess and waste, so I figured why not have a discussion about it

        Also, every fiat currency has failed in the two ways it can: hyperinflation or clout loss due to no trust in the issuing party (which tends to lead to hyperinflation). Innovation has stalled or at least hit the top of the S curve over the last 50 years, with mostly remixes of old ideas that tend to expedite the finite resources we have, so I don’t think technology will outpace inflation

    • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t agree with either of my statements, I’m just asking what people think of a new system. The current ones aren’t working for most living things on the planet in their current form, and it would be nice to have new thoughts

    • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Not OP, but as someone who was at one point excited by the potential of crypto, the ecosystem has moved more and more towards what it claimed to stand against initially

      It’s supposed to be decentralized, but things like mining pools have lead to heavy amounts of centralization in block production. If we look at Bitcoin, for an example, we see that over 51% of block production is controlled by just two mining pools. That’s not limited to just Proof of Work mining either. Proof of stake sees centralization in staking pools as well. That’s only just looking at one aspect of the network

      It has also not really been seen as a currency. People’s view of it as an “investment” which have the opposite qualities you really want to see. People are encouraged to hold it and never let go, meaning they won’t want to spend it which is adverse to its use as a currency. This has also lead to it being incorporated and dominated by the very financial systems it was initially supposed to move away from

      I don’t want to type out an essay, but I could keep going on in other ways that’s not really lived up to its promises.

      • Bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well, this is a fair criticism… of Bitcoin :)

        It’s supposed to be decentralized, but things like mining pools have lead to heavy amounts of centralization in block production. If we look at Bitcoin, for an example, we see that over 51% of block production is controlled by just two mining pools. That’s not limited to just Proof of Work mining either. Proof of stake sees centralization in staking pools as well. That’s only just looking at one aspect of the network

        Centralization of mining pools (and mining in general) is indeed a serious problem. In Monero we now have p2pool which is totally decentralized. For now it’s just shy of having 10% of total hash power, so there is a long road ahead, but we are moving there. ASIC resistant RandomX also helps to ensure mining decentralization.

        It has also not really been seen as a currency. People’s view of it as an “investment” which have the opposite qualities you really want to see. People are encouraged to hold it and never let go, meaning they won’t want to spend it which is adverse to its use as a currency. This has also lead to it being incorporated and dominated by the very financial systems it was initially supposed to move away from

        I don’t think this applies to Monero, which is more or less the only currency used in DNMs.

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Proof-of-work has inherent centralization pressures due to economy of scale. You get more profit per hash per second of mining power when you’ve got a bigger mining operation. That’s not the case for proof-of-stake.

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        There has been significant growth of crypto as currency, particularly in the developing world with use of USD pegged stablecoins. It remains the only practical solution to make online transactions privately or when alternatives have been censored, potential pitfalls notwithstanding.

        Centralized control is a threat, but it’s one that is taken seriously, and by practical metrics crypto has been largely successful in defending its integrity here. Other related values measures worth looking at are credible neutrality, permissionlessness, and trustlessness, also basically areas it continues to succeed. You submit a valid transaction to a major blockchain, it’s getting included, even if powerful people would rather it wasn’t. Transactions that are illegal as per US sanctions are treated more or less equally to any other. Miners and stakers are not taking control of the money printer dial for their own enrichment. And there’s reason to think this will continue, because in a lot of ways control is a liability, and giving it up is valuable; “CEO of Bitcoin” is not a sane title to aspire to because it would make you the responsible party and valid target for all sorts of legal threats and obligations, and just having it would destroy the value of what you control.

        That said, as a means for the economic salvation of the median person like OP seems to be talking about, it was never going to do that on its own, no one who thinks honestly about it would promise that, and anyone who did is full of shit. It’s just a new type of p2p money with some cool properties, that obviously isn’t going to be enough to fix the mess that is the world’s economic and political systems.

  • Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    As an aside, I’ve often wondered what would happen if everything was automatically adjusted for inflation.

    So like cost of living inflates, but then income is adjusted and bank accounts are modified to be their true value before inflation.

    Would this patch things up to be effectively 0 inflation? or (more likely) would this cause an absurd runaway effect?

    • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      The issue here is we actually don’t know how much inflation there is because we can’t measure the quantity of fiat, which is why there are dozens of “inflation measures” which just study different baskets

      But yeah, if inflation could be measured correctly and everything automatically updated (wages, costs, etc) then I’m not seeing an issue logically. But at that point it’s just a fixed supply of money and prices adjust up and down, irregardless of currency type. That sound reasonable?

  • finley@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Socialism. The problem here isn’t with currency, it’s with capitalism.

    • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Haven’t you seen how every time this has been done it leads to dictators and coups and massive starvation?!

      Yeah, it could be a faulty system or we just keep trying it in states that have enemies that don’t want it to succeed. I’ll have to do more research from more modern thinkers, because yeah capitalism isn’t sustainable without heavy regulation since humans are human…

      • J Lou@mastodon.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        A moneyless society that scales up to billions of people is unlikely to be possible

        Postcapitalist alternatives that use currency to facilitate trade between actors without social ties seem much more plausible
        @asklemmy

        • dmegatool@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          BTC 130% up last 365 days. 10% up last 30 days

          But seriously if everybody would use crypto, the up and downs wouldn’t matter. The value/pourcentage is only VS Fiat.

          • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Newsflash: currencies shouldn’t wildly fluctuate in value. The fact that people use it like a stock market investment, (and an idiotic one at that, since there is no underlying business), is exactly why it has failed to be a currency.

            • dmegatool@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              It fluctuate vs the Fiat value, not with itsleft. The supply of BTC is determined, not like the printing machines we got now.

              • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Nothing’s value fluctuates with itself. Money supply is controlled through interest rates in modern economies because it works better than directly controlling the money supply. Your comment betrays an unsurprising lack of understanding of the most basic concepts of economics. You’re just parroting some talking points you’ve heard from techbros.

                • hglman@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  No, you think economics is a physical science and it isnt. It works like it does bc its been made to work that way. It could work differently.

                  Also Bitcoin isn’t the only way cryptocurrency could or does work.

            • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pubOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              What does the term “wildly fluctuate” mean? In 50 years of USD fiat, gold vs USD has gone from 35$ to ~2000$ per ounce. That seems pretty rapid to me, since I can still talk to living people who experienced it

              At least BTC has historically gone up, whereas fiat goes down, although only a few years of data for crypto compared to thousands of fiat, so maybe crypto will do the same as well

  • Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    2 months ago

    what is a good way for the working class (90%+ of all humans) to save

    Gonna sound like a dangerous lemmy communist, but vote for parties who want to raise wages and join Union to defend your rights. The main problem is that most working class struggle to finish the month without a negative bank account, once it’s solved, saving become possible again