In a word: sustainability.
I am serious about replacing capitalism with what I (and increasingly many others) consider to be something far better than capitalism. In order to succeed, we need money to complete the transition. We need money to buy resources needed, hire people who have the skills we need. We need money to pay for technology needs, marketing, operations, rent and more. When we’re into our phase two operations, we need money to rent spaces for our events, pay actors and musicians and other creatives and more. When we’re in phase three, we’re going to need a LOT of money to wage political campaigns to place favorable politicians in state and local and federal elected seats. I talk about all of this in this post.
There’s another reason why Copiosis needs money. It’s personal.
Like everyone in capitalism, I want to have a life as free as possible from worries about money. That includes my financial future. Some people think I should do what I’m doing out of some altruistic calling. I don’t agree with that. I believe people doing what I am doing should be financially rewarded for the effort they make to create a better world.
There are CEOs who make tens of millions of dollars for selling shoes or computers or other widgets, or creating things that people value, but are actually harming the planet. There are people in vice president positions at such companies earning multiple millions of dollars supporting these companies. There are people who make hundreds of millions of dollars performing artistic acts (acting, singing, etc.), acts people love, but in the end, while moving and entertaining, they do not create fundamental change for the better. There are people who trade financial instruments who are worth billions.
The United States President earns approximately $200,000 a year for representing America. Yet, many of the things he or she, or their employees do we don’t agree with. They for sure are not trying to create the fundamental change I am creating. Indeed, they are more about preserving the status quo than they are creating any kind of real change. Yet, there is little complaint about the President’s salary. There are some complaints about CEO salaries. But for the most part, these people go on earning great sums of money for acts that are sometimes morally questionable and sometimes morally bankrupt.
I’m dedicating a large part of my life to changing the world in a significant way, a way that will make you far better off than you are today. In the last three years, I have, through my leadership, created significant evidence supporting the contention that what I’m doing is working, in large part due to what I bring to the table. I am creating a world where:
In short, I am working to make human society on earth as close to a utopia as is possible given present technology. What CEO, head of state, or other entrepreneur can make that claim? No head of state, very few CEOs if any, and very few entrepreneurs can.
Now, if CEOs can make tens of millions of dollars per year selling everything from toothpicks to airplanes, guns to atom bombs, if heads of states can be worth millions at the end of their leadership, no matter how many people their directives kill or how unstable the world gets because of their actions, how much should a person who is in the process of creating a world I described above make per year? I think the answer is “there is no limit.”
But in my mind, there is a limit because I don’t need unlimited income. I live a simple life. I am in the process of building a tiny house to live in and am letting go of many of my possessions. I like to sail and plan to live on a sailboat most of the time, sailing the world while I work on Copiosis and my other projects. A sailboat capable of continual ocean passages, one I can live aboard comfortably and safely operate is not inexpensive. Comfort and safety on the high sea comes at a relatively high price. I also have people depending on me for their living. Like you probably do.
I do not intend to accumulate a lot of possessions, stock, companies, or anything else from Copiosis funds. My time on Earth is not about excess. It’s about social engineering and living my dreams of creating a better world. That said, I believe anyone doing what I’m doing should be well-compensated because hardly anyone is focused on the problems and the wide-ranging benefits is creating. I also believe the people who will eventually work alongside me deserve to be well paid too. This is why Copiosis needs money. But it will be the best investment ever. Our plans are for millions of people to contribute on average $10 a month. The majority of those people will contribute far less than that monthly. So for between $1 and $10 a month per person (but not every person), all of humanity and the planet will be far better off because of what Copiosis promises.
What is that worth? More than what we pay CEOs selling fighter bombers, shoes and phones? I think so.
I have made a personal pledge that I will only begin paying myself when the finances in Copiosis make that possible and we have made significant progress in the work. I am in the process of setting milestones for myself for when I will eventually draw a significant income, but not until Copiosis has generated enough success to warrant such an income. I will be transparent about those milestones.
I think a reasonable person would agree that this question is kind of silly given what Copiosis is doing, and intends to do. But I understand people will ask because we live in a cynical, skeptical world.
The people working in Copiosis deserve to be rewarded for the effort they in investing in humanity’s and the Earth’s future they are creating. So do I.
We don’t blame people who think Copiosis is a scam. After all, our economy has conditioned all of us to beware of things that sound too good to be true. The way status-quo economies work, it’s easy for scammers to take money from us against our will. It’s been done at every level. It has left some people broke and bankrupt, their lives ruined. It has left others merely angry or feeling had.
Copiosis is no a scam. It is a real, increasingly successful approach (an idea coupled with a sound transition plan) designed to gently retire capitalism without taking anything from any one or opposing anything or anyone. Copiosis is also a company I founded to manage the approach and organize our efforts. As the founder and Chief Visionary Officer, I have put more than 10 years into Copiosis. Yes, Copiosis is officially only three years (as of 2016). But a lot has gone into Copiosis before that.
I’m committed to making Copiosis a global reality. We’re making progress, and the best progress is ahead of us. We don’t blame people for initially thinking that Copiosis is too good to be true. In many cases things that seem too good to be true are. But there are exceptions. Copiosis being one. But don’t believe me. Keep an open mind and see for yourself. The progress we’re making should be proof enough.
Copiosis is an innovation that eliminates all problems caused by capitalism (pollution, crime, unemployment, etc.) while performing far better than any form of capitalism that have ever existed. It spurs innovation like nothing seen before, while making the world a far better place for humanity and other creatures than it already is. Everything we love about the current system Copiosis preserves. But it gets rid of everything we don’t like. A detailed explanation is available on our website and also in a book I wrote about the innovation.
A short explanation (adapted from an answer provided by a non-Copiosis party):
In a Copiosis society (using terms from capitalism):
“There’s no such thing as cash. Money is replaced by a virtual form of reward called NBR.
If I “pay” for something, the money will go out of my account but it will not go into someone else’s account, it’ll just disappear out of my account and out of existence.
– If I get paid for something, my payment doesn’t come from someone else’s account, it’s instead just created in my account from nothing.
– People get paid according to their ‘net benefit’. This means that if I do something that benefits you but negatively impacts either another person or the environment then my net benefit will be: the good I’ve done you minus the bad I’ve done someone else/the environment. This means it’s in my financial interest to be as ethical and benign as possible.
– There are two types of commodities in the world: Necessities and Luxuries. Necessities are basic housing, clothing, food, education and medical care. All the stuff you need to live. This stuff is free for everyone in the world. Copiosis is founded on the idea that no one should have to ‘earn a living’ in a job they hate, earning just about enough money to stay alive so they can carry on going to the job they hate. We live in a civilization that could easily provide the basics of life for everyone for free, and in a Copiosis system it would. The only problem then is incentive to work. That’s where Luxuries come in…
– If you want anything beyond the glorified prison itinerary that Necessities provide (say you want a TV, car, designer clothes, musical instrument, nice furniture, cellphone, coffee maker, umbrella, whatever) then you’re going to have to do some nice stuff in order to earn some money!
– How people get paid is decided by a community called the Payers. A Payer will have an area they manage, say a zip code’s worth. Their sole job is to pay everyone FAIRLY. This organization is open to anyone who wants to be part of it. They determine pay for others by an algorithm created specifically for this purpose. There is a lot more to this, so if you want to know more you should do more research.
It’s a great idea in my opinion. It would give people and businesses financial incentive to treat each other well and not pollute the planet. Our current economic system (capitalism) works by rewarding exploitation and punishing kindness. Think about it, if I own a factory and I make sure all my staff have the best possible healthcare, comfortable working furniture, a company car, gourmet dinner in the canteen etc., then I’m spending (read: losing) money in the pursuit of kindness and equality. I’m being punished for being good.
Whereas if I sack all my UK staff and build a cheap factory in the Philippines that just about passes an inspection, where I can pay people a hundredth of what I’d pay them in the UK, I’m a winner! More money for me. Yay, I’m being rewarded for exploiting people. If I then dump my unwanted, polluting byproducts in the sea instead of paying huge sums to have it recycled or disposed of sensibly then I’m doing even better. While the system’s being so good to me, let’s create a new bank account in an offshore tax haven and hoard my share of the finite global economy as well. Way to go, Capitalism!
With Copiosis, I wouldn’t pay my staff a penny because that’s what the Payers are there to decide. But my local Payer will make sure I get more money paid to me if I’m treating my workers as well as possible, so it’s in my interest to do that. I’ll get punished for shipping my produce somewhere using a polluting petrol-powered truck so I’d better replace the fleet with electric trucks. No one build electric trucks? Then there’s an enormous gap in the market.
If people help fix the plumbing in poorer areas then they’ll get paid more than they would for installing a new jacuzzi in a mansion, so there’d be more market incentive to help the poor. Help the poor for long enough and what do you get? Equality. That’s the ultimate goal of the Copiosis concept.
Bonus info: net benefit works like royalties. Musicians today get paid every time one of their songs gets played on the radio, even if it’s 20 years after they released it. The same would apply to every job in a Copiosis world.
There are a lot of details and it’s too complicated to explain it all … but hopefully this gives you a basic outline…It’s already a thousand times better than the system we currently have.
Copiosis is also the name of the company I created to implement the innovation. I am the founder and Chief Visionary Officer of that company.
Copiosis is nothing like communism or socialism.
Communism is a political and economic system where the factors of production (land, labor, and capital) are owned by a central planning authority, often a government generally speaking. This central planning authority dictates how the factors of production are used to provide wealth in the form of products, services, and money in equal measure to all members of the Communist Party. Another key aspect of communism is that all property is owned by the central planning authority or government. It is not owned by private citizens. The idea of private property does not exist in communism.
In socialism, the factors of production are owned by the collective. The collective community through a central planning authority determines how the factors of production are used for the benefit of the largest number of the members of the socialist class, according to the needs of the individuals in the collective class. In both socialism and communism there is no such thing as profit. In both communism and socialism it is very difficult to allow for personal freedoms, because personal freedoms tend to lead to greater autonomy and personal authority expressed through personal freedoms that often come into conflict with the greater good.
Copiosis has several features that make it different than these systems. All property in Copiosis is privately owned, and decisions are made at the individual level. No one tells anyone else what to do, unless the people involved agree to such a relationship. The factors of production are owned by individuals. No two people can share ownership of anything. In Copiosis there is no central planning authority dictating anything. There is no collective and there are no classes.
First, “free” and “provided at no cost” are not the same thing. You can’t walk into a store in Copiosis and take stuff, because all property is privately owned. Second, the concept of having to pay for something is unique to current economic systems that generally are based on supply and demand, monetary policies, and the State, which regulates all these. Copiosis does away with government or at least makes it extremely small. It also defines a new system of compensation, a new way of looking at work, and a new way of looking at the output of human activity that makes paying for something a concept for the history books.
People who make things provided at no cost and things such as luxuries, which people must use their NBR to obtain, are rewarded for the benefit they create. The Payer Organization rewards anyone who benefits people or the planet. Providing necessities that are given to all at no cost is benefitting those people. So those who produce these things are being rewarded. That’s how Copiosis “pays” for things people get at no cost. You can read more about this in this free Insight Bulletin How Copiosis Works
Copiosis economies aren’t just about tabulating inputs and compensating with outputs. They are more about being good and making other people’s lives and the planet better. As such, contribution only needs to be measured approximately.
Of course, there will be people who will not want to contribute to others’ lives, and there will be people who can’t. For the former, people will still provide shelter, clothing, healthcare, food, and education to them. Except in the most extreme cases, most communities today support even the most introverted and anti-social, so long as that person is not harming anyone. In Copiosis that will happen even more. Why? Because those who provide necessities to such people will be paid, of course, with net-benefit reward.
Those who can’t contribute to society are treated even better. Why wouldn’t they be? Anyone who takes care of people unable to provide for themselves will receive better pay than people who do so today. I imagine they’ll also get much more satisfaction from the work, because people will be doing it out of love or compassion for others or a desire to express themselves this way—it will be their passion. Today, many such people do this work as a “job”. They have to earn a living, and they have chosen to this work for that purpose, not because it’s their passion. Some do it as their passion, but many of those people get bitter or jaded for a number of reasons. Politics, bad regulations, dictums from their higher-ups, and interpersonal conflict with peers often sour the emotional return. Capitalism pushes companies to make choices that are not in the interest of those being cared for in order to generate profit.
In Copiosis, there will still be personality conflicts within organizations. But there will no longer be higher-ups who tell you what to do. They can try, but you don’t need that work, so you can tell them to shove it. Businesses don’t have to generate profit and actually can’t make money at all. People working in organizations that take care of people who can’t contribute to society get paid only when they do things that make other people and the planet better. There is no cost restriction keeping them from doing whatever they can to help other people, so care for these people can improve dramatically.
In Copiosis, those who can’t contribute to society still contribute something significant that is invisible in traditional capitalism: the opportunity for a compassionate person to express that compassion and get paid for it.
In Copiosis economies, individual parents get rewarded for raising their children, adult children get rewarded for taking care of their parents, those who care for the disabled are rewarded for their efforts. Income from this real work today is either nonexistent or paltry. In Copiosis, the people who do this work will do it because of who they are.
There will always be people who can’t take care of themselves, or can’t (or won’t) contribute to society. Those people offer others an opportunity to contribute to society. In Copiosis, for each problem, an opportunity exists for someone to make net-benefit reward. Problems will be solved by people passionate about that problem. Solve the problem, you get paid, and those who don’t give a rip about the problem don’t have to!
Value is a concept we as a global society need to dispense with.
Initially, the payers decide what is categorized as necessity and what is categorized as a luxury. After the initial categorization of goods and services is considered, “value” is in the eyes of the Consumer and so is a separate matter that doesn’t matter much in Copiosis. Payers pay based on results (benefits – consequences). The algorithm used to do this is functioning today and has been used in our demonstration projects to reward over 50,000 NBR in many varieties of examples of transactions.
The bottom line is the only people who care whether a reward (dispensing with the concept of value) accurately rewards producers are the persons producing the good or service, and sometimes the person receiving the good or service. For example, you might be so amazed at the meal you just had, you want to send personal congratulations to the chef. Maybe you go home, or right there in the restaurant, whip out your mobile device and post a glowing review on Yelp, Foursquare, or tell your friends about it on Facebook. In Copiosis, you would want to make sure the chef be specially praised for providing such an amazing meal, so you would also let the Payer Organization know about your experience. That would influence their Net-Benefit reward to the chef for that period.
But in other places, my guess is you don’t really think much about the people who produced the good or service you consume. So, in most cases, the Producer is the person who cares most that the benefit her work creates is being recognized, since she perceives (rightly) that her reward is based on that. So she may or may not try her best to create “wow” experiences for everyone, every time, to get that customer bump. For the vast majority of products and services though, that’s tough.
Benefits – consequences is WAY more important than “value”. Societal resources (labor, resources such as minerals, trees, land etc.) being consumed when producing a product or service are quantified and subtracted from a similar quantification of the individual (the consumer) and societal benefits of consuming that product or service. It’s less about “value”, especially “consumer value” and more about actual benefits, or lack thereof. This is a critical difference between Copiosis and capitalism and why things we can’t seem to fix today, get fixed in Copiosis.
A couple examples: Today in capitalism, rhinoceros horns have TREMENDOUS VALUE for an EXTREME minority of the earth’s population considering all its inhabitants human and otherwise. As a result of the “value” this extreme minority places on these horns, people who provide those horns earn over $100K per horn. That leaves us today with no more Black Rhinos on planet earth. They were declared extinct about 3 weeks prior to this question being addressed. We could go on a long time about the number of species, raw materials, and life-sustaining resources (such as the air and water) we are or have destroyed as a result of meeting “consumer value” run amok.
In Copiosis economies, we don’t care about consumer values so much. In the case of people wanting Rhino horns for virility, poachers couldn’t get paid for poaching these poor animals, because the loss of Rhinos (i.e. extinction) is too great compared to a minority of people wanting to increase their libido.
The only reason why we currently don’t have consensus on the value of species vs. a minority of consumers and their perceived value of their body parts is because people earn a living cutting the faces off of Rhinos, fins off sharks or providing opportunities for other people to kill animals for sport.
Some people really want that horn. Some people really want that shark fin soup. If they really want that horn or that soup in a Copiosis economy, that person can go out to the savannah or sea and get their own. Most people will not want to do that, and people who do do it today only do it because they believe it’s the only way to live the kind of life they hope to live.
In a Copiosis economy they won’t do it because they won’t need to: They are living much wealthier lives as all their necessaries are being provided. And, there are plenty other more productive things they can do to earn money to enjoy the finer things, such as playing with their kids, teaching people how to make nets, or whatever their passion might be.
By value here, you mean, an allopathic drug has value to the maker in terms of making money, but harms people who take it. Is that right? Or maybe you mean the drug helps some people, but harms others? We’ll try to answer both questions at the same time.
Today, value is separated from consequences. This is true about nearly everything. So a drug maker can make a lot of money well before the full effects of the drug is known. If the drug turns out to be crap or worse, the drug maker still ends up keeping all the “value” (money) they made prior to that discovery. Even more money can be made if they can conceal the crappy nature of the drug. The longer they can conceal it, the better in terms of income potential.
In Copiosis, a drug maker doesn’t earn a dime until the results are known. So they can’t earn “ill-gotten gains”. Now, some drugs work for some people, but don’t for others. In those cases, we are getting into very specific detail for how the Net-Benefit calculation is done. But the principles upon which those details will be determined remain consistent: 1. Income is realized after the facts are known, 2. Income is based on actual results produced minus resources consumed 3. customer value has some input, but that input is small.
In Copiosis economies, even allopathic drugs get better because how much a drug maker gets paid is based on the results, not the “value”. So drug makers get better at what they produce because how much they make is tied to actual results. And since their costs of operation drop to zero, it’s easy for them to make what they’re making the best it can be.
Lots of things are different. But the most important thing to know is Copiosis frees people from the persistent problems gripping society:
You can read more about how Copiosis is different in this Insight Bulletin.
I’ve heard that before. Copiosis is not Utopia. Just because there are no people living on the streets, no taxes and no oppressive government in Copiosis doesn’t mean there are no problems and that no one suffers. People are, after all, people. There will be problems, people will still be bored, frustrated, angry, jealous etc.
There will always be naysayers for every great idea, great ambition, great undertaking. Everything on the list below was once thought unrealistic or impossible. And yet, they are happening. Today:
What do all these accomplishments have in common? A lot of people, some respectable people, thought they were impossible. What made them possible? The will of a few a great idea and time.
I’ve anticipated that. But Copiosis not only makes rich and powerful people even richer, it allows them tremendous future potential to become richer still. A rich person will love Copiosis. Once they understand there is nothing for them to fear about Copiosis and everything to gain, they too will support it.
But not everyone will find Copiosis attractive. The power-hungry, those who take joy in other human being’s suffering, those who profit from killing and exploiting other human beings may find very little they like about Copiosis. But they can’t resist the overwhelming tide of people we expect will want to see Copiosis happen.
Every person who has fully understood Copiosis believes without a doubt that it is better than what we have today and will work once implemented. I only ask that you find out more, get involved in our demonstration projects and events and then answer the question for yourself.
If anyone is being fleeced it is me. As the founder of this idea, I have invested my savings, my energy and my time in making this system known so that others can help make it a reality. As a result, Copiosis is known world wide and there are people around the world now investing their own time to help make it a reality. That may not convince you that Copiosis is quite realistic. I only ask that you watch our progress and judge for yourself.
Everyone who has thoroughly understood Copiosis believes it’s preferable to what we have and can deliver on the promises it makes. Please take a look at our testimonials.
Copiosis uses income signals (rather than price signals) to drive resource conservation: the more scarce a resource, the less Producers get paid when they use that resource to produce a good or service. Smart Producers will find substitute resources or, switch their efforts from using those resources to working to restore them or conserve them. It is possible for Producers to earn nothing as a result of using very scarce resources.
Conversely, restoring or conserving a resource that is becoming scarce is a positive benefit and results in income when pursued. If restoration is not possible in human time scales (such as with a mineral), conservation (through using substitutions, innovating synthetic versions, or out right refusing to use said resources) also results in income. So would identifying other plentiful sources of said minerals, such as asteroids and other planets. Since cost (money) is no longer a factor in a Copiosis Economy, space exploration and colonization becomes practical. Examples aside, managing resources this way is more powerful. Much more powerful than trying to force people to not do something while nearly everything in the current system compels them to continue doing that thing you don’t want them to do (consuming a resource to depletion in return for profit)!
First, today, in nearly all countries (I think) someone already is making that judgement for you and for other people. In some cases, it’s your government, sometimes it’s your boss at work or the company at large, sometimes it is your girlfriend, boyfriend or spouse, or your kids. Sometimes it’s your parents. So, it isn’t an unfamiliar concept to have someone judge some action as good or not good for another person.
There are multiple levels of “goodness” as well. For example, smoking has benefits and negative consequences at the individual level. At the social level, smoking has a different set of benefits and consequences. At the socio-economic level, smoking has another set of benefits and negatives. Unfortunately for society at large, the decisions being made at the individual level generate tremendous costs socio-economically, when those decisions are made individually by many people over time. Faced with a different context, many of those people probably would not undertake that behavior (smoking for example). But more importantly, Producers today are compelled to satisfy or even create behaviors (such as smoking) because they need to earn a living + generate enough income to live the kind of life they want. The question, therefore, is more interesting than simply a question about who is deciding what for whom.
In Copiosis, we have an elegant approach to dealing with this interesting situation. Let’s just keep to the Copiosis Economic Philosophy. Firstly, the determination of Net-Benefit doesn’t have to be precise. Secondly, does it really matter who makes the decision, so long as the people interacting with that decision maker believe the decision is fair? Thirdly, everyone involved in the transaction has input into the decision so they influence how fair the decision will be. Fourth, the only person being compensated for the results is the Producer.
This structure has huge benefits for the long run: This is critical to understand. Let’s put what’s “good” aside for a moment.
Today we don’t have an effective mechanism to account for actions widely agreed as “bad”. Pollution, crime, poverty, homelessness, lies, deceit and manipulation in politics…unethical corporate behavior, etc. are examples of this bad action. In effect, bad action is a kind of tragedy of the commons. People can get away with such actions because there is very little consequence most of the time. Copiosis changes this by holding people – not companies, which is a powerful distinction – accountable for all their actions, both good and bad. That is a major problem with our current systems: they don’t do this. Holding people accountable, in the long-term, is extremely helpful. And effective.
In Copiosis Economies people no longer need to earn a living. This is a critical point and it can not be over stated. One of the huge results of not having to earn a living is that “fair” becomes much less of an issue. The thing we should focus on is the “bad” actions. What’s “Good” will take care of itself in Copiosis.