'Even beyond the technological challenges, there are lots of other obstacles to change. Stephenson, who has “devoted a shocking amount of time” lately to learning about alternative space-launch technologies, said at MIT that “the reason none of them happen turns out to be insurance.”'

I think that the economic model and related institutions (and the social model) are actually antagonistic towards the application of technology. I learned that mostly from Jacque Fresco and Peter Joseph et al. I disagree with their solution in that they are talking about a centralized control system, but most of Fresco's ideas I think are correct. He just formed his theory before the research came out on how decentralized distributed systems are more robust.

So I don't think you can do away with money like the ZM people suggest, BUT you do need to be aware that there are quite a few important problems with the economic model, for instance the way that automation eliminates employment and therefore the consumer base. Look up the Zeitgeist Movement/Venus Project and you can see all of the arguments. Where I differ is in my solution. I think its important to automate and move away from the consumer driven infinite growth ownership/labor model but I think that once we do that, rather than centralizing and homogenizing automated systems, we just need better information distribution, common data formats and exchange. We need to have a more unified view of the real world and to be able to easily exchange information about it holistically. But it is crucial at the same time to allow for diverse solutions to shared problems. That is necessary to make the system robust, allow it to evolve, keep people sane, etc.

I think that representative government, if it was ever really supposed to be representative, has proven to be subservient to money. Also governments have a monopoly on force. I see governments as entrenching moneyed power and enabling its use of force against those with less money. Essentially money is a point system that represents power. I don't think we want to do away with the point system, at least its a way of keeping score. However, we do need to change the nature of money and correct the fundamental problems with belief systems such as the Social Darwinistic viewpoint held by most people. There is no group of truly superior individuals who deserve to have vastly more wealth and control than most people, or a large group of mostly worthless humans who don't really deserve to live. However, I really believe that most people deep down believe both of those things. Those beliefs support the current social framework, which as I said is antagonistic towards the application of technology, as well as creating massive inequality.

So "economics" needs to become a real science by first accepting a more up-to-date non-eugenicist model of humanity and its place in the universe as well as integrating physical and social science. This will make it much easier to apply the scientific advances we already have to solving common human problems. Humans need hierarchy of some sort as well as a way of keeping score and satisfying primate needs etc., but you have to integrate that with physical reality and common needs.