[futuravenir]

How about spending financial wealth on an educational program that redefines wealth? I've started studying what Arthur Brock is doing and am trying to implement it into my alternative economics startup as much as possible. You cannot break down the Co2 that is processed by a tree into dollars...It's like breaking down the value of a human being through how much plasma can be extracted and selling it at market rate.

http://www.artbrock.com/videos/arthur-brock-transitioning-ne...

[eru]

> It's like breaking down the value of a human being through how much plasma can be extracted and selling it at market rate.

That certainly puts a floor under the value of a human being.

> You cannot break down the Co2 that is processed by a tree into dollars

Why not?

[futuravenir]

The point is that this is the value obtained through extraction. There are other values that are non-financial that are not being calculated into the equation.

Trees are ecosystems. Human beings are ecosystems. They interact in incredibly complex ways with their external ecosystems.

To answer more simply, you can't break down the Co2 into dollar-value because it isn't the only value that a tree has. It has an incredible amount of all kinds of values. It helps create shade for other types of plants to grow, so we need to factor that in. It creates a habitat for certain insects that help with pollination. Those insects help keep away another type of insect that are bad for reasons X, Y, Z. The relationship is so vast and complicated, that to simply say, a tree is worth $40,000 is judging it by the wrong qualities.

It's like judging Einstein's Theory of Relativity based on the amount of words, but not on the ideas that are created when someone reads it and is inspired to create something new. Or judging a healthy diet simply by the amount of calories. It just doesn't work like that in the real world. The financial extraction of value is based on limited qualifiers that do not take into account the complexity of true-to-life value.

[eru]

Putting a label of a certain monetary value on things doesn't deny that there's other value judgements to be made.

How do you decide which tree to cut down? Or whether to cut down a tree or break a stone?

[futuravenir]

Well, by taking into account all of the potential value judgments, then utilizing the ones most relevant to your decision, acknowledging the short-comings of your decision and making good on them.

Acknowledge - 100 values that Tree A brings. 85 values that Tree B brings. Judge - 12 values from Tree A are relevant to our decision. 8 values from Tree B are relevant to our decision. Cons - 3 values are really important that we should rectify for Tree A. 5 values for Tree B. Make Good - 1 value of Tree A cannot be replicated. All values of Tree B can be replicated. Conclusion - Cut down Tree B. Benefit from it. Make good on 5 values that are important.

I literally made up this decision-making on the spot, but if I put more than 30 seconds into it, I think I can refine it and make it applicable to a lot of spots. Yes, they would require qualitative thinking and are more complicated than a simple monetary equation, but it considers all of the externalities of our decisions beyond financial gain/loss and that was my initial point.