I think it would be silly without money in the world.
How will my grampy play 'shove h'penny' without a coin?
How will a referee start a game of footie without tossing a coin?
What will you get out of a cash machine?
What will a wallet or purse be used for? Have you thought that our streets will be littered with them because they will be useless?
The star prize of a suitcase full of crisp bank notes on Bruce's 'Play Your Cards Right' will no longer be offered.
How will the Salvation Army attract the attention of the unassuming Saturday morning shopper without being able to rattle a coin filled charity box?
I think this is ill thought out and it could have a serious knock-on effect for the environment, popular TV game shows and pub past-times, not to mention worthwhile charity causes.
Please reconsider your suggestion and put it to the rest of the forum members.
Money is nice to have, but I think people with a lot of money sometimes become too materialistic, whereas people with less can appreciate smaller things. Obviously that is a mass generalization, but it is just something I have noticed from like say when you go to Africa, and see the people who have no money, and hardly any food. They are still such a happy , and look on the bright side o things, and then you look around in England and see how much people seem to focus on the negative side of things.
Sorry for that ramble/rant but it is just something that confuses me!
Geordie lass, I have never been to Africa unlike yourself as you mentioned in the above post.
But I think it is an unfair comparison of money between England and Africa and, furthermore, the parts of Africa that are starving as you pointed out. They rarely appear happy to me, though I have never been, but I see this in TV reports.
A third world country cannot have the same experiences on quality of life as a first world country, simply by definition.
They can never be materialistic as there is nothing to envy. They have to appreciate smaller things as that is all they can achieve.
It isn't confusing. Poor people live in England as well as Africa. It is just relative.
Originally posted by Tartanveggie: I could look after people's kids in exchange for carrots and pototoes. Yay!
Whose kids would I look after to pay my electric bill though?
But if you allow people a mandatory 28 days to pay their chid care fees you run the risk of receiving mouldy carrots and potatoes. This would be no use to you or anybody. Except pigs.
Originally posted by Tartanveggie: I could look after people's kids in exchange for carrots and pototoes. Yay!
Whose kids would I look after to pay my electric bill though?
But if you allow people a mandatory 28 days to pay their chid care fees you run the risk of receiving mouldy carrots and potatoes. This would be no use to you or anybody. Except pigs.
It would work fantastically well in theory, but would break down in practice. The only way I can see this functioning well was if it was in very small groups of people, like little kibbutz(es? what's the plural of kibbutz??). They'd have to have little or no contact with each other community, else they'd start exchanging, and soon enough some kind of value system of money would probably arise.
And it's very difficult to forge a self-sufficient community of people.
We need money (and forgive me if I just change this to capitalism- are we not really talking about this?) to better society. There needs to be competition so that we find the best ways of doing something. There needs to be promise of reward so that people take risks, and there needs to be incentive to enterprise. Unfortunately I don't see how any of that can be possible without money.
