No, they don't necessarily follow. There are and have been primitive cultures without money, and also without peace & harmony.
2006-09-07 16:09:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by yahoohoo 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that some form of monetary credit system will always be necessary as long as there are goods and trade. Unless there is enough of everything to go around, and you eliminate greed beforehand, there will never be true peace in a barter society. I would, however contend that a single global economy and currency would go a long way towards world peace.
2006-09-07 16:11:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sonic 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Money is only a commodity to trade with. It's what we now 'barter' with. Before 'money', traders, traded their goods with other goods, or precious stones &/or metal.
Those without 'money' sometimes are very peaceful and harmonious, & those WITH 'money sometimes are also; but turn it around, and sometimes those without 'money' are NOT at all peaceful or harmonious...or visa vi.
One does not necessarily follow or 'bigat' the other. Peace & harmony are not the result of having enough to barter with...and are not a commodity. Peace & harmony is a state of mind...a state of heart...a state of the spirit.
2006-09-07 16:16:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You can't eliminate money
except you want to make a world without possession
which will cause:
1. all you have could be taken by anyone anytime,
2. what others have could be taken by you anytime
which that will start a strugle, a fight, a worst kill other just because of greed. --> this will be just the opposite from what you want.
[no barter but free for all].
Except you could/want to make this world has nothing.
[Nothing to get, no possession, nothing to barter]
Remember, the cause of money exist is because:
First time human has no tools to barter, so they can't barter equaly (like 3 chicken barter with 1 cow, that not right!)
So they create things for bartering, like gold, craved stone, and many more... until money is created.
If you want peace and harmony is exist for once for all, all you need is eliminate everything that has greed, want to have many possession, one who always see others is better that his/her.
If you want peace and harmony,
destroy any technology (cause technology create tools for war),
destroy all who create/believe religion (cause different religion cause fight),
destroy all differences (cause difference create jealous, jealous cause war)
~~ that means you need to kill all human being to make peace and harmony ~~
2006-09-07 20:27:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Joxie 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
OK, hippie, how will you set a value on the products of mankind's efforts? By government fiat, or the edict of the nearest tyrant?
Money in a free society acts as an impartial judge. It is neither good nor bad. It is the reward you get for your creative, rational effort to produce something worth buying.
2006-09-07 16:13:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by sandislandtim 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ain't so little boy. How are you going to have anything without a means of trade. Money in its self has no value. It is useful as a means of trade rather than you having to do something or give something to another for receiving something from them. You do your job and get paid for it and then take the money and buy something with it this is trading what you do for what others do. No matter how you cut it it still will be cheese.
2006-09-07 16:33:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I can assure you that if money is eliminated, peace and harmony will not follow. Money is not the root of all evil.
The LOVE of money is the root of all evil.
2006-09-07 16:14:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by no nickname 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Money, nor the love of it, is not the "root of all evil" my friend. Money is simply an energy source, which, if you continue to be afraid of it, you push it out of your sphere of existence. Money is neither good nor bad. It is simply a tool with no inherent moral value.
2006-09-07 16:32:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by LindaLou 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you eliminate money then we'd have to resort to stealing, which is less efficient. I don't think the results would be desirable. Money is used to allocate scarce resources. Even if resources were infinite, wouldn't we then overconsume?
2006-09-07 16:27:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by szydkids 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
No it wont work it goes against human nature.
2006-09-07 16:10:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by Guywiththehir 3
·
0⤊
0⤋