Mormonism and the United Firm

[LeSellers]

My point is that nobody needs to accept any money for a resource.

No, he does not. But that's not the question. See above.

Why use money when we can simply give things away?

If you want to give things away, do it. The issue is, when you've given everything away, you have nothing more to give away.

Trading always increases the total wealth in a community (wide or narrow), giving things away does not.

Try imagining how it would be more honorable to just give something away to someone who will use a resource for a good purpose, if you're not going to use it, and that it is a given that someone in Zion would use their resources for a good purpose, otherwise they would not be in Zion.

So, who determines what "a good purpose" is?

Remember, getting rich or making a monetary profit will not be in the mindset of someone in Zion, because they will already be rich with everything that has been given to the collective whole of everyone in Zion.

There need be no "profit" motive. However, that's not the question. See above.

Zion is all about doing not only what is good for you, but also doing good for all of the other people you can help, in any way you can help them.

The free market is about doing what other people want. Because if you do not do what other people want, they will not trade with you. So, how is your hypothetical Zion society different from a free market? The difference is that in a free market, resources are not wasted (in the long run).

There will be no rich/poor distinctions in Zion. Everyone will be equally rich, or equally poor, with no one person or group of people having an advantage over anyone else, because they'll all be in that enterprise together.

In a society lacking a pricing mechanism to identify the highest and best use of resources, there will be no rich, and all will be poor, because the total amount of wealth will fall. A free market increases the amount of wealth. It will distributed in different ways, depending on the the society's mindset. A free market is not incompatible with a Zion society, and neither is money.

You do realize this thread is all about "Mormonism and the United Firm" don't you?

I can read.

I can also see that the "United Firm" relies on things that are not defined, and specifically that things are in unlimited supply. I cannot find this supported in any scripture.

Try thinking about how things will be done in Zion, rather than how things are done now by people of the world, generally.

A Zion society will still have to allocate scarce resources. The question is how. And I am asking you (and any one else) how scarce resources will be allocated and still meet the requirement that people will be, in the aggregate, happier than they were.

I'm aware of that, and that's why I said the "first come first served" idea reflects only one way to distribute resources.

So what are others that address an on-going society, rather than a virgin-forest, new-world illusion?

If I add my time, skills, and efforts to some resource, I have made that new thing my own. What (including giving it away) I do with it is my business, but if someone were to confiscate it contrary to my will, he has just made me a slave for the time it took to create it.

that person could decide to just not use it, leaving it there for someone else to use.

Which means he places no value on his resources.

Considering the fact that we're talking about people who will be in Zion, I'm simply saying it will be up to each person to decide how to put something to good use, with one possibility being that each person will decide to ask someone else, or some other group of people, if they would like to use a particular resource... FOR FREE!!!

The question remains, though, while you were creating this new thing, is you were not growing food, you were not sewing clothes, you were not patching your roof.

In a Zion society, perhaps someone else did these things for you, but there was no trigger mechanism to indicate that you needed them, no way for the shingle manufacturing plant to know how many shingles to make, no way for the asphalt plant to know how much asphalt to ship to the shingle plant, no way for the oil driller to know that the plant'd need the crude, no way for the drill bit maker to know that the driller would need the bits. This mechanism works in advance of your need, sometimes years in advance.

You do know, do you not, that it takes the efforts of dozens of thousands of people who do not know you, to get a pencil into your pocket? They don't do it because they want you to write a grocery list, they do it because they know you will.

Money isn't requisite, or necessary, and, personally, I don't see any good reason to use it.

Then good luck carrying sheep to trade for a canoe so you can access that piece of land you need to grow the cotton you will trade for the lettuce you want for your salad this afternoon. (I hope you see the need for time travel without money.)

Earlier in my posts, I defined money as something which is used to get something ELSE of some real value, with money, itself, having no intrinsic value of it's own, and based on my definition I was saying it's not necessary to have money because there is no need to use a "medium" when instead you can just get what you really want to get, without having to have a medium first.

Your definition is fine, I suppose, but it is fatally flawed, because that is not what money is in the real world.

Of course, and at the risk of getting political, in today's world, there is a lot of money that was not created by the sweat of [a man's] face. But we are not discussing fraud, because, in a Zion society, as either of us envision it, there is no fraud.

Charity in our hearts, with the desire to help both ourselves and each other get all the good things we can get and while distributing the products we produce with the resources we have to work with as fairly as possible, through common consent, with no rich or poor people among us, at all.

Charity is the key.

This is true, but it still does not answer the question: how does your version of a Zion society allocate scarce resources so there is the greatest happiness among all of its inhabitants?

Lehi

[mercyngrace]

Let's play "you are the Bishop, and we are transitioning to the LOC".

Were the LOC to suddenly replace tithing, I think a great sifting would occur. There might be a lot of people who would simply decide it wasn't worth living the LOC to have a TR. Those who decided to live the law would have to be completely committed to it. Remember though that they are only contributing their surplus. Anyone who is presently self-sufficient, would remain so. No one should be suddenly going without in order to live this law.

Part of instructing church members on this law would be expressly stating that the LOC is dependent not only on charity but also upon the principles of sacrifice and self-reliance. Purposefully incurring excessive debt or expecting other members to work so that you can maintain a certain lifestyle is not in keeping with the spirit of this law. These things would have to be made clear at the outset.

The same process for offering aid to members that is presently in place would remain. Bishops and RS presidents should verify needs and help anyone in need find ways to reallocate the resources that they do have so as to maximize their self-reliance. Do bishops presently give money and food to non-members? Non-tithe-paying members? If so, that could continue but only after the needs of those living the law are met.

Eventually, more and more people will seek shelter in Zion and desire to live the law that proceeds forth from that establishment. This implies that people will become increasingly righteous and desire godliness - being more and more prepared to live the LOC.

What is disheartening is that we have to address these types of questions. It shows how far we are from being a Zion people.

For the record, I can think of many people in my ward, stake, and family who I believe would fully live this law today if they were asked to do so. Many nearly do already.

edit: I wonder if worrying about possible abuses of the system is like preparing for war. It's important to have defenses in place, of course, But what would happen if we refused to take up arms against our brethren, prostrated ourselves on the fiscal battlefield, and simply sacrificed because we covenanted to do so. Would that win converts?

[Ahab]

Absent a pricing mechanism (monetary or not), how does a Zion society allocate its scarce resources so as to provide the maximum happiness to its citizens?

You have not addressed the limited resource, nor have you talked about maximizing happiness. And, don't you know, man is that he might have joy?

I did answer your question by suggesting that Charity should be the mechanism to use when determining how much to give someone to help them to be happy, by balancing their needs and desires against what there is to give and all of the other people there are to give things to.

Happiness, and joy, don't involve giving a person everything they want or ask for as if they are the only persons in existence, and as though everything in existence was created only for them. A society like Zion includes more than just one person, and the needs and desires of each person in that society need to be weighed against everyone else's needs and desires, as a collective whole.

Perhaps if you gave me an example of a resource that can't be duplicated or brought in from somewhere else, I would be able to give you a more detailed answer or at least have more to discuss with you on this issue. At this point, though, I feel like I have already given you a decent answer to your questions, and I have other things to do and other people to talk with.

[LeSellers]

I did answer your question by suggesting that Charity should be the mechanism to use when determining how much to give someone to help them to be happy, by balancing their needs and desires against what there is to give and all of the other people there are to give things to.

That's not a mechanism, that's a description of your imaginary world.

Happiness, and joy, don't involve giving a person everything they want or ask for as if they are the only persons in existence, and as though everything in existence was created only for them.

You are missing the point, and dodging the question.

You have not talked about scarce resources at all. In your mythical world, the things you want are suddenly available without anyone's knowing you want them.

A society like Zion includes more than just one person, and the needs and desires of each person in that society need to be weighed against everyone else's needs and desires, as a collective whole.

I know that.

What I am asking, and you have failed to address, is how anyone knows what needs to be done, when it needs to be done, and how it needs to be done while wasting the fewest resources possible, and making the most people happy.

Perhaps if you gave me an example of a resource that can't be duplicated or brought in from somewhere else, I would be able to give you a more detailed answer or at least have more to discuss with you on this issue.

Oil.

It takes unimaginable resources to bring it to a point that those who need it can use it. It takes knowledge, it takes capital equipment, it takes transport, it takes refining, it takes a distribution system for the refined products.

Electricity.

It takes some form of fuel, it takes a distribution system. It takes a safety system. Oh, and a generator.

Leather.

It takes someone who will kill the animal. It takes someone who will tan it. It takes someone to cut down the tree to get the tannin. It takes someone who will move the hide to the shoe factory.

Pencils.

It takes copper ore, it takes zinc ore. it takes rubber, and grit, it takes cedar wood, that must be cured and shaped and painted (with paint that takes its own processes and materials). It takes graphite, it takes gums and adhesives. It takes machinery, it takes paper )for the boxes for shipping), it takes inks, it takes transport. It takes people, it takes management, it takes a dozen other resources and coordination. A pencil "comes form" all over the world.

There is almost nothing in modern society that does not require a myriad of people and efforts, of materials and ideas. I'd challenge you to find any significant thing that does not require many inputs that are not readily available in a smallish area.

You specify "cannot be brought in", but bringing things in is no small task in and of itself, so your stipulation is self-refuting.

Lehi

[USU78]

Man, don't you know anything? Property is theft and all that makes anything worth anything is labor. It is the value of the alienated labor in these products which matters- who needs materials to make things?

Do I have to teach you everything? Cheesh!

I am an egg.

I grok nothing.

[Ahab]

That's not a mechanism, that's a description of your imagination.

You're saying Charity is a description of my imagination, and I know better than to believe you when you say that.

Would you like to try again?

You are missing the point, and dodging the question.

No, I'm on target and I have answered the question. I don't know why you can't see that, but I can see just fine.

You have not talked about scarce resources at all. In your mythical world, the things you want are suddenly available without anyone's knowing you want them.

I asked you to give me an example of a scare resource to help me go into some more detail for you.

I see that you did that further along into your post, so I'll skip to that section to address that issue now.

Oil.

It takes unimaginable resources to bring it to a point that those who need it can use it. It takes knowledge, it takes capital equipment, it takes transport, it takes refining, it takes a distribution system for the refined products.

My ideas regarding allocating that resource (oil) and how people would provide that resource to others in Zion using other resources (knowledge, machinery, transport equipmenet, buildings, etc) is centralized in the idea that the people who want to provide that resource to others would work to provide that resource as a form of service to others in Zion, free of charge, with the oil itself being distributed to others in Zion according to the good uses that resource can be put to use for, with charity in the hearts of all who both provide some sort of service and the oil to others in Zion, and with those who use the oil using it for a good purpose toward the collective good of all in Zion. Nobody would be doing what they do to to have an advantage over others in Zion who they would consider to be the poor people. All in Zion would benefit, collectively, from all of the oil that was produced, without the rich/poor distinction we see in this world between those who have and have not.

Is that enough of an answer for you now? If not, perhaps you need to ask me some more questions to get my mind working some more so that I can provide some more details, but at least I'm giving a decent answer to your question. If you're expecting me to say that some people are out of luck, though, you can forget about that, because as I seee it everyone would benefit, in some way, from having that oil in Zion, otherwise nobody would work to produce it and instead they would be doing better things with their time.

Electricity.

It takes some form of fuel, it takes a distribution system. It takes a safety system. Oh, and a generator.

Leather.

It takes someone who will kill the animal. It takes someone who will tan it. It takes someone to cut down the tree to get the tannin. It takes someone who will move the hide to the shoe factory.

Pencils.

It takes copper ore, it takes zinc ore. it takes rubber, and grit, it takes cedar wood, that must be cured and shaped and painted (with paint that takes its own processes and materials). It takes graphite, it takes gums and adhesives. It takes machinery, it takes paper )for the boxes for shipping), it takes inks, it takes transport. It takes people, it takes management, it takes a dozen other resources and coordination. A pencil "comes form" all over the world.

There is almost nothing in modern society that does not require a myriad of people and efforts, of materials and ideas. I'd challenge you to find any significant thing that does not require many inputs that are not readily available in a smallish area.

In general, it takes people doing some type of service to provide for all of the products that are to be produced in that society, whether people are building buildings or manufacturing equipment or growing food or whatever it is that people will do in that society, with Zion being no different, except that in Zion all of the products will be distributed more fairly to everyone rather than only the "rich" people getting to enjoy the good things there are to be enjoyed in our lives.

You specify "cannot be brought in", but bringing things in is no small task in and of itself, so your stipulation is self-refuting.

Lehi

God will be with us, Lehi, and if he wants to bring something into Zion from another continent, or from some other part of our planet, or even from another planet, or if he wants to teach us how to bring things in from other places, he will be able to do that, and that's all I was alluding to when I asked you to give me an example of something that couldn't be brought in from somewhere else.

[LeSellers]

God will be with us, Lehi, and if he wants to bring something into Zion from another continent, or from some other part of our planet, or even from another planet, or if he wants to teach us how to bring things in from other places, he will be able to do that, and that's all I was alluding to when I asked you to give me an example of something that couldn't be brought in from somewhere else.

So, you're denying the premise of scarcity.

CFR.

Lehi

[Ahab]

So, you're denying the premise of scarcity.

CFR.

Lehi

Not quite. I'm asking you to provide an example of something that we wouldn't be able to bring in from somewhere else in support of YOUR premise that some things would be scarce.

In other words, I CFR'd you first.

Get back to me when you have something in mind.

[LeSellers]

You're saying Charity is a description of my imagination, and I know better than to believe you when you say that.

No, I'm saying "Charity" is not a mechanism for allocating scarce resources.

You may imagine it is, but it is not.

I can describe the process of price as it allocates scarce resources, and I have. But you have not done so with charity, and I am challenging you to do so.

Lehi

[Ahab]

No, I'm saying "Charity" is not a mechanism for allocating scarce resources.

You may imagine it is, but it is not.

I can describe the process of price as it allocates scarce resources, and I have. But you have not done so with charity, and I am challenging you to do so.

Lehi

You're challenging me to describe how charity works, and I did so by telling you that we would be acting with the interests of everyone in mind as we do things for the collective good of all in the Zion society.

You're welcome.

[LeSellers]

Not quite. I'm asking you to provide an example of something that we wouldn't be able to bring in from somewhere else in support of YOUR premise that some things would be scarce.

In other words, I CFR'd you first.

I provided a list of things that cannot be brought in from somewhere else. I gave you the reference.

You reply the God will take care of it. I ask for any indication in scripture (or elsewhere) that this will happen. I am fully aware that God could do any of this. I am wholly unaware that He has promised He will.

I restate my call for reference as you have not met it and did not even try.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

You're challenging me to describe how charity works, and I did so by telling you that we would be acting with the interests of everyone in mind as we do things for the collective good of all in the Zion society.

You're welcome.

Hand waving does not meet the requirement of a call for reference.

Pretend I'm dumber than a rock (I know, it's very difficult, but try), and explain how charity will allocate scarce resources to maximize the total happiness of all of the members of the Zion society as you imagine it.

Scarcity of resources demands, by definition, that some demands will not be fully met. That's the nature of scarcity. But, as I carefully explained earlier, the total happiness of the society is maximized with a pricing mechanism, and, to the best of my knowledge, no other means has ever been advanced that comes remotely close to meeting that standard.

So, I'll wait for your pronouncement.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

In general, it takes people doing some type of service to provide for all of the products that are to be produced in that society, whether people are building buildings or manufacturing equipment or growing food or whatever it is that people will do in that society, with Zion being no different, except that in Zion all of the products will be distributed more fairly to everyone rather than only the "rich" people getting to enjoy the good things there are to be enjoyed in our lives.

Let's look at medicine.

Doctors are a scarce resource. There are not enough of them to meet the needs of society today. I know that you could hypothesize that there will be no need for doctors because we will have complete Priesthood blessings and no one will ever be sick, get injured or require a heart transplant. However, give me my premise for the sake of advancing the discussion. (I'm watching C-SPAN and they're discussing O'bamaCare, so it's on my mind.)

There is no substitute for a doctor. So how does one use this resource to the maximum effectiveness? A doctor cannot work 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. But there is a potential need for just that. So, do we call on his Charity and expect him to work himself into the grave (which will limit the supply of doctors even more), or do we allocate that scarce resource in some way? I hope we would. But I can assure you that first-come, first-served, is not the most effective means of distributing this service. Those who would be served would be happy, but those whose needs were most intense, arriving later, would not be. The first would not even know of the others, or, doubtless, they would cede their position in the queue. But, as I said, they did not know, nor did the doctor.

Furthermore, we need to assure the doctor gets sufficient rest, so that we do not lose him, nor get second (or third) rate care because he is unable to think rationally, being too tired to do so.

Finally, let's assume he feels tired or sick himself. do we then compel him to show up at the office anyway? Should the ill simply, in their charity, go home and die?

Charity is not a mechanism for allocating scarce resources. The price structure of the free market is and has proven itself for millennia.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

You're challenging me to describe how charity works, and I did so by telling you that we would be acting with the interests of everyone in mind as we do things for the collective good of all in the Zion society.

You also have not shown that there is a communications system that will allow each individual to know when his Charity is needed.

When, for instance, should I leave the loaf of bread on the shelf so another Saint can have it? Or should I just never take one, because someone else may need it more?

Naturally, at some point, I will die from a lack of food, but I will have fully implemented Charity, will I have not? And, if everyone decided to do this same thing, the bread would go stale and moldy and become useless to the entirely of the dead society.

A pricing mechanism avoids all of these problems.

Lehi

[mfbukowski]

Glad to see Tony is getting his life back. Makes me wonder when his BP's victims will get theirs back.

http://www.markfiore.com/

Boy you just love dropping these political bombs don't you?

Did you drive your car today? Where did the gasoline come from? Let's all stop driving so this never happens again.

[mfbukowski]

Hand waving does not meet the requirement of a call for reference.

Pretend I'm dumber than a rock (I know, it's very difficult, but try), and explain how charity will allocate scarce resources to maximize the total happiness of all of the members of the Zion society as you imagine it.

Scarcity of resources demands, by definition, that some demands will not be fully met. That's the nature of scarcity. But, as I carefully explained earlier, the total happiness of the society is maximized with a pricing mechanism, and, to the best of my knowledge, no other means has ever been advanced that comes remotely close to meeting that standard.

So, I'll wait for your pronouncement.

Lehi

Maybe it would help if we discussed it in terms of demand.

If we had SUV's free for the asking, houses and airplanes free for the asking, how many of each would we need? One for every human in the world. Or at least every family. We can't be too greedy can we?

More than exist in the world today, in every category. Because today they actually cost money which is a barrier to demand. When demand is unchecked by price, demand would go to infinity or close, and the supply would diminishes to zero.

And who is going to pay for the production of more? No stockholders for investment. Heck there's no money anyway. No incentive for anybody to do anything.

But I suppose it is too much to ask that he would understand that.

If we can't have 100% home teaching because people love their neighbors, how can we expect them to give them an SUV because they want one?

If you don't volunteer for every temple assignment, if you would ever turn down a calling or do not pay your tithing or are inactive- if you don't go on every possible assignment because you love your neighbor, this is not going to work.

I don't want to be negative, I just want to emphasize how important it is that we - each one of us- do our very best if we are ever going to become a "Zion" people.

As I have said, if the Savior himself is standing there leading the government, we have something else entirely, but what we are talking about here is implementing this soon with today's people, and not during the Millenium.

That's why I was so insistent on establishing a time line. Unless we do this with a very limited population who is ready or unless everyone is reduced to zero posessions because we all now figuratively live in a Haiti-like situation, with today's people- even today's average member, it just ain't gonna happen

I really want it to work, but I just don't think it's realistic. It has never worked before- what has changed?

So what do we do?

Start with a small nucleus of people who are willing to go without? How do we do this?

[LeSellers]

Boy you just love dropping these political bombs don't you?

Did you report this?

Lehi

[mercyngrace]

Boy you just love dropping these political bombs don't you?

Did you drive your car today? Where did the gasoline come from? Let's all stop driving so this never happens again.

I just realized that I didn't really answer most of your question. Sorry. I was trying to respond and kept coming and going from the laptop because my brood was especially wild and demanding this afternoon.

Transitioning to the LOC in a communal cashless society would be difficult but I have seen some things in the past that give me hope it could be done, at least on a small scale.

For example, some of the units we were assigned to in the military had community closets. People donated appliances and household goods that were then borrowed as needed from members of the unit and returned to the closet at a later date. Many places we lived had larger items that could be borrowed (lawn mowers for example) with nothing more than an ID card and a signature. You were expected to maintain the equipment and return it after use.

My town now has a community garden where you pay $10/month and commit to working an hour or two a week in exchange for fresh produce. Were something else exchanged instead of the $10, the community garden would still function.

IMO, every RS should have a ward closet and every ward should have a community garden. LOC or no LOC, these are just good ideas.

[mercyngrace]

No incentive for anybody to do anything.

Herein lies the real problem.

So what do we do?

Help people find and feel the incentive.

[wenglund]

If we can't have 100% home teaching because people love their neighbors, how can we expect them to give them an SUV because they want one?

Forget the other 30 or so pages of pontifications because this puts it all into perspective and in a nutshell.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mercyngrace]

Forget the other 30 or so pages of pontifications because this puts it all into perspective and in a nutshell.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Anyone can identify a problem. It take a genius to provide a solution. What's yours?

Edit: My solution is to keep leading people to this doctrine.

[wenglund]

I just realized that I didn't really answer most of your question. Sorry. I was trying to respond and kept coming and going from the laptop because my brood was especially wild and demanding this afternoon.

Transitioning to the LOC in a communal cashless society would be difficult but I have seen some things in the past that give me hope it could be done, at least on a small scale.

For example, some of the units we were assigned to in the military had community closets. People donated appliances and household goods that were then borrowed as needed from members of the unit and returned to the closet at a later date. Many places we lived had larger items that could be borrowed (lawn mowers for example) with nothing more than an ID card and a signature. You were expected to maintain the equipment and return it after use.

My town now has a community garden where you pay $10/month and commit to working an hour or two a week in exchange for fresh produce. Were something else exchanged instead of the $10, the community garden would still function.

IMO, every RS should have a ward closet and every ward should have a community garden. LOC or no LOC, these are just good ideas.

They are certainly ideas, but when you compare them to Walmart (in terms of most efficient allocating resources and maximizing of happiness) I wonder if they are so good.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mercyngrace]

They are certainly ideas, but when you compare them to Walmart (in terms of most efficient allocating resources and maximizing of happiness) I wonder if they are so good.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade,

You're starting in on the wrong person. I never suggest we abandon money or live in a commune. I was just trying to respond to mfbukowski's question since he directed it at me.

MnG

[mfbukowski]

IMO, every RS should have a ward closet and every ward should have a community garden. LOC or no LOC, these are just good ideas.

What's a Relif Society ward closet? What's in it?

Where does the land come from for a ward garden?

I think your experience of what wards and members are willing to do is different from mine. I agree the garden is a great idea- I just don't know where to put it.

After some thinking about it, I would guess there are maybe 100 people in our stake who might be likely candidates to do this now or soon. (LOC) Maybe a dozen couples per ward and a few singles? So that figure would not include kids.

Are you thinking more or fewer?

[wenglund]

Anyone can identify a problem. It take a genius to provide a solution. What's yours?

The solution has already been provided, not by a genius (unless you include revelation and inspiration from God), but by millions of minds evolving over time: a free-market economy kept in healthy check by people living according to the precepts of the restored gospel. That is my vision of the LoC and how I strive to live it today.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-