This site is dedicated to the abolishment of all forms of economic exchange.

How will goods and services be produced and supplied when there is no money around?

The workers at the coal mine dig up the coal and leave it at the gates for anyone to pick up free of charge. The baker bakes some bread and leaves it for anyone who wants it. And so with the butcher and so on.

Why would the coal miners turn up, also the baker and the butcher and so on?

People work for many reasons. To have a sense of purpose in the world, involved in the progress of mankind. Let's face it, work is something to fill a day in with! Would people simply give up working if money was abolished? And do what? Stare at their navels all day long? I doubt it. And just think what would happen if nobody worked. Things would deteriorate rapidly. Hospitals would fall to bits, along with any other buildings. There would be no food. Water would be contaminated. There would be no transport. The list goes on. People would not tolerate a decay in the standards of living that they have been used to. Scientists and health care workers, to give just two examples, work in their respective areas because, on the whole, they care passionately about their fields. A salary cheque for these intelligent and intellectual people is not the main reason for them having the types of jobs that they have, it's merely a bonus in a monied society. And remember, there is a conflict of interests for a health-care provider. The doctors and nurses provide a valuable service and need to be rewarded fully, but the more money that goes into the pay packets of these people, the less there is for medical equipment and drugs. That dilemma would not occur in a money-free society. And, don't forget that there'd be unlimited resources for drug development, therapies and treatments. How wonderful for a biochemist to go to his lab knowing there was nothing to hold him back from pushing the limits of knowledge back. How sad, that, today, the NHS (National Health Service, the UK social health provider, funded by taxpayers and free at the point of use in most cases) has such difficulties. Juggling finances and beds on wards. All of that would be gone. Over in certain African countries, the poorest of the poor would have access to all of the medical treatments available anywhere (no transport costs and no drugs costs, etc) so no more blindness for want of a simple operation to remove two cataracts.

Wouldn't people just go crazy and stockpile resources for themselves, selfishly?

What would be the point? Every good and service would be in plentiful supply for anyone at no cost. There would be no point at all in selfishness. There could be instances of what might be called 'waste'. Somebody might create a giant video wall in their back garden wiht thousands of televisions, gargantuan works of art might be created by anyone and put anywhere. However, these things would be likely to be undertaken only by the minority.

Would people have personal possessions?

Yes, but that would not take the form of stockpiling as mentioned above. People would be perfectly entitled to have personal possessions. Most people wouldn't want to share their homes, for example, and, why should they? Maybe communnal living would evolve in the future, but there is no necessity for it in a money-free society. And there'd be unlimited resources to build homes.

Wouldn't there still be lazy types who would not do anything and just sponge off everyone else.

Of course. But there are these types today and they would be much diminished in a money-free society. Opportunities would be available for all -- education unlimited in resources (including teachers), unlimited employment and so on. Forget about unemployment, there would be no unemployment. if a relative few wished to do nothing and live off the rest, so be it. Good luck to them.

Wouldn't the Earth become polluted? There would be unlimited exploitation of the planet's natural resources, surely?

Don't forget that there would be unlimited progress in all areas, including technology. There would be no stopping the development of cleaner, greener energy and for cleaning up the world, unlike today, where fitting, say, sulphur-reducing equipment to a power plant costs big money. Today, it costs to be good. Cleaning up polution is a part of the financial equations of businesses and governments. Money used for the environmental good can not be reused for something else, say, product research and development, marketing and so on.

What about national defense and policing?

A country that went it alone and abolished it's currency would be an example to the rest of the world. We need to see ourselves as one species, not as Britons, Americans, Italians, Peurto Ricans, Argentinians, etc. For goodness sake, let's be united and not divided, lest mankind will ultimately become extinct at it's own hands. I would hope to see no borders. Keep an identity, if you must, but the supply of goods an services must be global and without restrictions. There has been, every year, since WWII, enough food to feed every man, wonam and child on the face of the Earth. Yet it costs too much to transport. This, of course, would not be a problem if we went money-free. There would be so many goods and services that there would be plenty for everyone and no need to fight over it, as I said, selfishness would not make sense. As for policing, there would certainly be no need for financial crime. You can't mug somebody for money, burgle, swindle or sell drugs and sex for money when money does not exist, it would be impossible. There'd be sexual crime, but I can't see how it would be any worse. With the availability of whatever goods and services you want -- all your wants satisfied -- how could you be unhappy? In a happy society I think there would be a tendency for less crime. in any case, there wold still be law and people prepared to uphold it, just as there would be scientists and doctors.

Why don't you just satisfy yourself with abolishing capitalism?

Because that would solve nothing. In the former USSR (an example of a closed-market economy) everything still had a price tag on it and had to be paid for. Only the abolishment of all forms of mutual economic exchange (including money) will work.

Can you conceive of any problems with the abolishment of money?

A powerful, advanced, almost self-sufficient, country, like the USA, would pose a potential danger to the rest of the world if it unilaterally abolished money. It would be able to develop it's military strength rapidly and race ahead of everyone else. Within a relatively short space of time, it would be practically militarily invincible and able to excercise it's will on others as never before. Therefore, it would be better for weak, inadvanced, dependant countries to abolish money first, allowing them to catch up with the rest of the world.

Footnote.

Money is not sent from heaven above, neither does it grow on trees, naturally. It is a man-made entity. Why, then, have it?