Mind Mastery

There are many ways to achieve the same thing.

For example, keeping public toilets clean and removing litter from the streets.

One option is to have someone employed by the city council, being paid to do a job from funds that have been coerced and threatened from everyday people.

Sure, this works, but can we do better?

How about we have a rotational system of different people in the community volunteering to clean our public toilets and pickup rubbish?

Yes, this can work and doesn't require only one person to do all the dirty work, plus it doesn't require theft or any money to implement.

Can we do better?

We can build automated systems in the public toilets that clean the bowls, seats, sinks and floors whenever required. We can also build an automated machine system to pick up all the rubbish for us.

This is possible, but will require a reasonable amount of work to implement and may be something we focus on after prioritising more important tasks first.

Sometimes, all that is needed to solve a problem is to ask a better question.

If people clean up after themselves at home, then why are they incapable of doing the same in public?

Shouldn't we be tidier and more respectful when in public than in private, because we are in public!?

Many problems can be solved with simple education and respect.

If people treated a public toilet like they hopefully would their home toilet, they would leave it clean and tidy, which then wouldn't require someone else to clean up their mess.

If people were educated from young ages at school, by parents and from higher social standards, there would be no reason to pay someone to pick up rubbish, or volunteer to pick up rubbish, or to build a machine to clean up rubbish.

This is because there would be no rubbish!

Why would someone litter if they were well educated as to all the reasons why they shouldn’t disrespect their land and town?

If people really understood the environmental impact, took pride in the way their rivers, lakes and parks and streets looked and didn't think it was a trendy thing to do, no one would litter.

If people knew that the river running through their town belonged equally to them as it did to everyone else, they may think twice before throwing a plastic bottle into their river.

Not many people throw rubbish all over their bed and floor in their home.

Because it’s their property and they have ownership over these places.

If people felt like they had more ownership and responsibility for the rivers, mountains, lakes, beaches and streets, they would be far less likely to destroy an environment that they jointly owned.

If people were educated properly about rubbish and littering, there would be no need for a job to exist that cleaned up the mess of others.

Technical solutions can be as complex as a farming machine that digs channels, plants seeds, covers the seed with dirt, fertilisers and waters the plant all at the same time.

They can also be as simple as people being responsible for their own actions.

Why would security guards need to stand guard in front of a building wasting their precious life being bored out of their mind if we can create a society that doesn't require security guards?

Or in the meantime, teach the other staff how to perform a multi-functional role.

Especially in parts of Asia, where there is hardly any need for security guards, let’s devise a way to help save them from the extreme boredom and dissatisfaction that standing in one place doing nothing is sure to cause.

If there is a way we can create solutions that replace the need for an undesirable job to exist, then it is our duty to implement the technical solutions to improve the quality of life for everyone.

Our current economic strategy has only one goal.

Monetary profit.

This is one of the most destructive, wasteful and unintelligent mindsets the human race has ever foolishly participated in.

Out of this mission of monetary profit comes the abomination of planned obsolescence.

Planed obsolescence is the production of inferior quality products which are designed to have a short life span so they can be sold, break and be resold in a continuous cycle all because of monetary profit.

Cars are designed to break so you spend money fixing them and buying new cars to replace your worn down old model.

It also serves to keep people in cycles of constant repetitive work, which then takes their focus away from new ideas and enjoying leisure time.

The same is said for phones, computers, furniture and most other technology.

This keeps the cycle of needing to work for money so you can afford to buy what you need to sustain your life because everything you buy breaks and needs to be replaced.

How can you ever get ahead if you’re constantly fixing and replacing crappy quality products all the time?

It’s very difficult.

Do you think that the Allen key, hex head screw, flat head and Phillips head, amongst all the other types of nuts and bolts, with their thousands of sizes and equal variety of tools is because of strategically efficient and intelligent design?

Or because of the exact opposite, deliberate complication and as a way to waste resources?

Because in systems that operate based on monetary profit, wasting resources is one of the best ways to increase profits.

The more unnecessary variety you can create in components, parts and servicing tools, the more you can sell and the more profit you can make.

Flat head screw drivers, Phillips head, hex keys, adjustable wrenches, spanners, sockets, Allen keys, torque heads, multi grips, vice grips and any other tool which is responsible for installing or removing a bolt or screw like part.

Is it wise to have this many tools for essentially the same function?

What about all the companies that are behind these duplicate tools and components, their labour efforts, paper waste from managing and advertising their unnecessary tools, the construction of their headquarters and manufacturing buildings which shouldn't even exist?

Efficiency and clever resource management is of little concern in a monetary system.

It doesn't matter if you work on cars, in constructions, on phones, laptops or in your home, tools are used for building and fixing just about everything.

Without tools, we could not get to where we have today.

Without a change in thinking about tools and how they’re used, we cannot get to where we want tomorrow.

Instead of making one universal screw and nut head and accompanying tools with perhaps 10-50 different sizes, ranging from very small for phones and large for trucks and planes, the monetary system has developed an entire economy purely on the illogical and inefficient design of extremely excessive tools and parts.

In a monetary system, there may be in excess of 1,000 tools needed to work with the same amount of parts, that in a strategically efficient and intelligent system, could be easily replaced with less than 50 and closer to 10 realistically.

This is in reference to all the types of parts in all constructions across the world that require tools to fix or build.

All a screw, nail or bolt is used for, whatever the product is, is to hold two things together.

Surely, with such a simple application, the best design can be used as a universal head for all new designs and constructions.

By doing this, we can save on tool space in our home or workshop, save an extraordinary amount of precious resources that are wastefully used to produce unnecessary tools, and while still operating in a monetary system, save a very large amount of money.

Not to mention become more productive and efficient in our work, as we can do more with less.

Another very powerful method we can use to strategically produce low cost and sturdy building materials and products is by effective and innovative recycling and manufacturing.

This is called a circular economy.

This ties in with the concept of localisation and not being so dependent on external resources for localised progress.

Every town already has an abundance of building materials, they just don't know it.

There are already initiatives happening in Australia called local recycling manufacturing plants which turn your donated and unwanted mattresses, furniture, electronics, plastic rubbish and anything else into new materials and products.

If you watch this 30 minute documentary, you will discover how this powerful concept can be applied to every single town that wishes to become sovereign and Utopian.

Imagine what we could achieve by this one simple mindset shift?

From a wasteful attitude to a recyclable attitude.

If we aren't working towards a zero waste economy, we’re doing it wrong.

Instead of throwing our rubbish into a land fill to be buried and to pollute the ground, or to be burned and emit toxic chemicals into the air, we simply recycle it to build new items.

All your disposable plastic packaging transformed into new tables, chairs, couches, kitchen tiles, floor tiles, doors, plastic bricks and so much more.

The amount of money and energy that could be saved from needing to harvest new materials, transform them into something usable, package and ship them is enormous.

The quality of recycled materials is often higher than the original designs, which means you’ll save money and time in the long run too.

Saving the environment, saving money, saving time, saving resources and saving energy, what’s not to love about recycling and manufacturing new products out of what was once junk?

When your towns folk start donating waste to the local recycling plant, instead of paying to dump it at the tip, we can use a contributionism system to build new materials and products with no labour cost and no material cost.

With the inclusion of small to large scale 3d printers which can use this recycled plastic, we have a wealth of opportunity for what we can create, for next to little cost or none at all.

The materials and products we build can then be provided to your community for free, which then encourages more people to join the contributionism membership and for more people to volunteer more than 3 hours per week.

Not because they have to, but because there is so much work variety and community spirit, that they want to.

We can use the same idea for our food scraps.

Every home and business can have a food scrap and organic matter bin.

We can have volunteers part of the contributionism system who then pick up this material and deliver it to who ever needs it.

The organic matter gets distributed for free to farms and gardens to be used as fertiliser and animal feed.

This will save farmers and gardeners from needing to buy so much fertiliser, animal food and save on council rates as our contributionism system will be handling the rubbish disposal.

Why pay for council rates, as the main cost was rubbish disposal, when we have our own volunteers recycling all our waste?

From organic matter to plastic to glass to old furniture and computers.

We can intelligently recycle and reuse all of our unwanted waste.

Nothing needs to be wasted and we hardly need to spend money at all if we can get so much of what we need for free.

When we decide as a town community through real democratic voting to rebuild our roads with recycled plastic, which is cheaper, easier to install and much longer lasting, then we really have zero reason to pay the government council anything as they aren’t actually contributing anything.

The goal is to move towards a circular system where everything that is created is used for as long as possible, then recycled to become something new.

We want to begin doing this on the local level, with each and every town, suburb and village being able to locally manage their own resources as much as possible.

Once we become proficient at this, we can miniaturise the recycling and manufacturing technology to become compatible for the home level.

When we’re able to recycle and manufacture new items from the comfort of our own homes, that’s when we’ve become fully self sufficient and strategically efficient with our resources.

Imagine the potential if every home had a recycling station and 3d printer which could build a new laptop with the latest open source designs, print new furniture and make new kitchenware.

Creating self sufficiency at the local and home level for food, water, energy and materials is a powerful way to create Utopia and to be rid of money.

The opportunities are endless with but a little imagination and dedication.

Is it efficient to have so many different journalists, reporters and media channels, when most of them are paid to work from a script?

Is diversity really the best way to distribute the news?

Or is it better to have only a few professional volunteer media stations that tell the truth, rather than a hundred paid ones which don’t?

Is it necessary to have fashion updates and new ‘styles’ every few months, which sparks huge amounts of waste when clothes become ‘outdated’?

Also adding that the fashion industry is the second most water using industry, right after agriculture.

Does there really need to be 60,000 different types of t-shirts?

Or 200,000 different types of shoes?

They are just clothes, this amount of variety is a ridiculous way for people to express their uniqueness and individuality, as all it shows is that one is a conformist to whatever the current ‘trend’ is.

Uniqueness, personality, individuality and character come from within.

What you wear has only a very small impact on sharing who you are.

The way your body looks and what you can do with it is a much greater expression of who you are then what coloured fabric you wear.

The fashion industry is just another sub section of the economic enslavement cycle of ‘work, buy, work, buy, work, buy die.

As long as the monetary system is able to seduce you into wanting and needing things which are totally unnecessary in reality, and only have perceived ‘value’ inside the monetary system, you will be forever stuck in a job you dislike forced to earn money so you can conform to current society.

Even if you enjoy your job, do you enjoy it so much that in a moneyless society, you would continue doing it for free?

Why do we have a 1,000 different types of phones and digital cameras?

Wouldn't it be far more intelligent and practical to combine all the best features from the best designs and combine them into 1-10 different best of the best models?

Even if we deliberately tried to create as much waste as possible to destroy our resources and pollute the planet, we could not compete with the monetary system, as it’s simply the most effective waste and junk producing system there is.

Just to maintain meat and dairy prices, mega farming and agriculture corporations often go out of their way to destroy food produce so they can create more scarcity which will raise or maintain prices.

This is obviously mad and can only happen in an absurdly inefficient monetary system.

How frustrating and inconvenient is it when you break a windscreen, side mirror or part of your car, then go to the store to replace it, but they don’t have your specific part.

They have 10,000 other types, just not your type.

This cross incompatibility of components is only possible in a monetary system.

Why does every country seem to have a different power socket?

This an example of more incompatibility and unnecessary production of socket adaptors.

More wasteful management of resources because of a poorly designed, disconnected system.

Although countries like Nepal do utilise universal wall sockets to combat this problem.

Is it fair that for most people to earn a living in a monetary system, they must submit to a private dictatorship?

Sure, some business leaders treat their workers respectfully as team members, but most business leaders are not leaders, but mini rulers, my way or the high way type of attitude.

Not everyone has the interest, skill or money to start their own business, yet is this reason enough for them to be forced into servitude just to survive?

Especially when there are systems like contributionism that exist, opportunities which allow all who participate to contribute their ideas and be part of an interconnected team managed by elected, project specific leaders, which anyone with the desire and talent can apply for.

Any system that has waste is a flawed system.

For every problem in the world, someone has already created the solution.

-------------

The following is an extract from Jacque Fresco’s book, “The Best Money Can’t Buy”, inventor of the RBE, resource based economy.

“As we outgrow the need for professions that are based on the monetary system, such as lawyers, accountants, bankers, insurance companies, advertising, sales personnel, and stockbrokers, a considerable amount of waste and non productive personnel could be eliminated. Enormous amounts of time and energy would also be saved by eliminating the duplication of competing products. Instead of having hundreds of different manufacturing plants and all the paperwork and personnel that are required to turn out similar products, only very few of the highest quality would be needed to serve the entire population.

Take the automobile. In order to service conventional automobiles today we have to remove a great deal of hardware before we can get to the engine. Why are they made so complicated? This reason is simply because ease of repair is not the concern of the manufacturers. They do not have to pay to service the car. If they did, they would design automobiles that consist of modular components that could be easily disengaged, thus facilitating easier access to the engine. Such construction would be typical in a resource-based economy. Many of the components in the automobile would be easily detachable to save time and energy in the rare case of repair, because no one would profit by servicing automobiles or any other products. Consequentially all products would be of the highest quality, and they would be simplified for convenience of service. Automotive transport units engineered in this way can easily be designed to be service-free for many years. All the components within the car could be easily replaced when needed with improved technologies. Eventually, with the development of magnetically suspended bearings, lubrication and wear would be relegated to the past. Proximity sensors in the vehicles would prevent collisions, further reducing servicing and repair requirements.”

This same thinking would be applied to all products. Industrial devices would be designed for recycling, but there would be much less recycling when we build household material and products of superior quality designed not to wear out or break down.

Shipping and transportation systems would be fully utilized in both directions of travel. There would be no empty trucks, trains, or transport units on return trips. There would be no freight trains stored in yards dependent on the business cycle for their use.

----------

Does creating segregation in an air plane or train by dividing the sectors into classes contribute to equality, or does it cause there to be inequality?

It takes almost the same amount of resources to design something, in this case, a chair, in a luxurious fashion compared to an ‘economical’ construction.

Why would we do such a thing in a strategically efficient, resource based economy that is managed by a voluntary, real democratic system?

We wouldn’t, as it’s preposterous to create unnecessary division and to operate society on systems which allow some to have access to a higher quality of life and others to a very poor quality of life.

This kind of strategic thinking is to be applied to all things, from cars, houses, technology, clothes, furniture and everything else.

It takes less resources to build things to a high standard, as they will last much longer and you don’t need to create nearly as many items.

If people had access to the highest quality car with all the best components that lasted for at least 20 years without maintenance, they wouldn't have to keep buying new cars and new parts constantly.

It takes less materials, resources, time, energy and money to build things properly once the first time.

If we build low quality roads or houses, we are constantly working, paying and using resources to fix them.

How many technological items get disposed of every year because they break within 3-12 months of use?

Imagine if we built the item to a high standard to last at least 20 years.

You would only need that one item for 20 years compared to 20+ of the same item over 20 years.

It’s far more strategically efficient to stop producing junk and to only produce the highest quality, top tier products.

There should be no classes of quality when it comes to cars, homes, computers, and anything else.

There should only be quality.

If something is ‘low’ or ‘medium’ quality, then it is not quality!

Not only do we all deserve the best quality items humanity can invent, it saves so much time by producing something right only once, instead of wrong a 1,000 times.

It saves money for the manufactures and the buyers as they both only have to produce 1 item and buy 1 item, it saves the environment and it means that people have things that actually work well, instead of hardly work.

Planned obsolescence and making low quality junk products is strategically inefficient and illogical in a reality based model of society and economics.

In a belief based monetary profit model that has no care for people or the environment, then sure it makes sense.

Profit is not a bad thing, but monetary profit often is.

If someone was to design a free energy device and give it out for free, the receivers of the invention profit via free energy and the inventor profits from the results of what free energy can produce.

If someone creates a course educating people about the damages of littering, people profit by learning from the course and the course creator profits by seeing a tidy and neat town.

In today’s current mess, people do require monetary profit to survive.

But if we wish to thrive, we need to replace our old way of caveman thinking and replace it with civilised and innovative ideas.

Designing new technology to be modular is a more intelligent method than buying a whole new item, when an old component of a car or computer is outdated, it can be easily removed and replaced with a newer design and the old part can be recycled to create something better.

If we have two options, build roads the same way we do now, requiring immense labour, cost and resulting in low quality and a short lifespan, or we can build a road in a manner that is cheaper, faster, easier and longer lasting, then we should choose the better method every time.

When ever there is a choice of building something new, whether it be a computer, car, road, house, bridge or hospital, we should always opt to choose the method which is easier, stronger, more reliable, simpler, longer lasting, cheaper and better.

Why is it that in today’s world, we tend to always do the opposite of this?

Because it keeps the economic entrapment wheel of subtle slavery and control ever spinning.

The rich get richer, the poor get poorer and control tightens to fewer and fewer people at the top of the pyramid.

Is this what we want?

To quietly sit back, do nothing and to casually stroll into our prison, lock our own cage door and throw away the key?

Why would we do that when the alternative is preferable, easier and far more enjoyable?

All it takes is a little thought and imagination and we can overcome most of our problems with relative ease.

As for every problem we create, we can more easily create a solution.

The Tenth Utopian Principle Of Strategic Efficiency eliminates waste, planned obsolescence and misused energy and creates intelligent designs for intelligent results.