Matt draws my attention to a new economy called “Copiosis”.

Society just provides the basics to everyone. Then there’s “Luxuries”, and you’ve got to be a “Producer” to get those. Society will reward “Producers” with those “Luxuries” as, when and if production of things of benefit to the greater society are provided.

So, universal basic income with a gift economy, sorta, on top.

So far, so millennarian. And then the crunch.

Which producer gets what Luxury is the decision of the Payer, one for each block or geographic area. The Payer does not partake of the economy, instead is supported by the gifts of the inhabitants of the area.

Congratulations, we’ve now got New Age Fascism. The Gauleiter for each block, living off taxes, deciding the income of each inhabitant. It’s not even socialism, in which the workers get the goodies, everything is politically decided. Decided by the local dictator.

At which point fuck off matey.

16 thoughts on “Copiosis”

  1. The “luxuries” would just got to those who decide who is a “producer” and is thus deserving of said “luxuries”. Which sounds a lot like Socialism in practice: the workers never actually got the goodies.

  2. What are those “luxuries”. Organic foods, artisan crafts, or fast cars. I suspect the former rather than the later.

  3. Yes, this is pretty much how Progressives see the world. This is why they are comfortable with themselves having high incomes, nice houses, lots of possessions etc, because they think it is right that they are “rewarded” for their social justice work. So the “producers” who will get the “rewards” will be activists, journalists, academics and so on.

    The “block wardens” idea recurs throughout Proggressive/Leftist history, particularly in the USA. It was common in the Jewish districts that produced the Red Diaper Babies who produced Neo-Progressivism, for instance. Hanna “End Of Men” Rosin has boasted about her mother being one, and tyrannising everyone else through wielding the power of this “office”, for instance.

  4. Who gets to decide what’s of benefit to society? Who gets to decide who is the decision maker? Why should I be forced to have a luxery I don;t want because somebody has decided I should have it?

  5. “things of benefit to the greater society”

    Defined as? Decided by?

    I don’t think we even need to dignify this pish by discussing it, really.

    But thanks anyway, Tim, because vigilance should never sleep.

  6. Herrumph,

    Fellow Travellers


    TZM? Ah, “The Zeitgeist Movement”.

    With all of Earth’s resources in decline, it is time to scientifically manage the ones we have left. In this brand new episode of Off the Grid, Peter Joseph talks about the benefits of moving away from a market economy toward one that is based on resource management

    As our host has pointed out, this is a misunderstanding of the technical meaning of the word “resource”.

    The Venus Project

    It calls for a straightforward redesign of our culture in which the age-old inadequacies of war, poverty, hunger, debt and unnecessary human suffering are viewed not only as avoidable, but as totally unacceptable.

    Utopian nutters. From Florida. So probably best left alone undisturbed.

    Russell Brand


    The Auravana Project

    A holistic, evolutionary, self-directed and self-integrated civilisation.

    To continuously and consciously evolve toward our highest potential through resilient adaptation to experiential existence.

    Utopian nutters with added culture theft.

  7. jgh:

    If you don’t want a luxury (say, f’rinstance, lunch) just let us know and we’ll give you another chance at it later, when suppertime rolls around (and in a nice plastic bag–if you give us one when passing it up at lunchtime). .

  8. Bloke in Costa Rica

    I think the most important thing is to make sure that the bayonet you use on these people is long enough to go all the way through, so that spectators can see you twisting it from the back.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *