To: Friends, Innocents, and Lurkers. The DDotSQ already know what they want.
Hi folks,
In my previous note, Macro & Micro Models of a Nation, III, Date:
99-06-05 17:40:48 EDT, speaking as an engineer, I wrote:
>>
The task ahead is to show the lurkers and innocents on these several lists
just how well the Macro Model <FIG4B.GIF> and the Micro Model <FIG8.GIF>
comprehends the financial structure of industrial economies
<<
A far more comprehensive and more fundimental description of the task ahead
was given by Dr Louis G Reynolds in the following exchange of notes with
Sheherzad Tsar on mail list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>>>>> begin exchange between Reynolds and Tsar <<<<<<<
Subj: Re: Wealth
Date: 99-06-09 07:55:50 EDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Louis Reynolds)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Multiple recipients of list)
sheherzad tsar wrote:
to my mind, the process of wealth generation will be different
in the coming century....it will transform from its infancy as of
today to a more matured and sophisticated form of information
related process...to support my theory, i have relied on a very
crucial source.....transformation of light rays particles into
information or thinking particles....these particles are then
programmed to generate wealth without the involvement of humans
or other life forms....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
An interesting thought, and not as far off the mark as it seems.
I think (s)he is referring to photosynthesis, the fundamental primary
producer of wealth for us here on earth since the beginning of time.
We need access to the products of photosynthesis for all our
important needs-- including our clothes, the food we eat, the air we
breathe, the disposal of our waste, our climate--without it we
would all be dead.
While we humans are not necessary for photosynthesis,
photosynthesis is certainly essential for us. And this is not going
to change in the coming century, or millennium, or ever.
Other life forms, however, are necessary--together with sunlight.
This primary process of wealth creation needs green life
forms--essentially plants in all their diversity.
The problem is that through our relentless and shortsighted pursuit
of "wealth" (as defined by most mainstream economists), we are not
only exceeding the capacity of this fundamental source and putting
unsustainable demands on it, but also causing it harm from which it
may never recover.
We will not destoy it completely, we will destroy ourselves first.
And then the cycle of photosynthesis and other life forms will carry
on creating wealth without us.
Louis
*******************************************************************
Dr Louis G Reynolds
Department of Paediatrics & Child Health
University of Cape Town
Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital
Rondebosch 7700
South Africa
phone: +27 (0)21 658 5354 fax: +27 (0)21 689 1287
658 5111
>>>>>>> End exchange between Reynolds and Tsar <<<<<<<
Quite obviously, the essential task ahead is to moderate "our relentless and
shortsighted pursuit of "wealth" (as defined by most mainstream economists),"
and replace it with an equally relentless but farsighted pursuit of happiness
at a minimum cost to the eco-system.
Now it seems a matter of common sense, before we devise grand plans to effect
such a paradigm shift, that we inquire into the primary cause of our "our
relentless and shortsighted pursuit of "wealth" (as defined by most
mainstream economists)," and achieve a "sense of the meeting" as to just what
that primary cause is. What makes us act the way we do?
But the only way to arrive at a "sense of the meeting" is to have one or more
definitions of the primary cause of our social disorder subjected to open
public debate. We might start by selecting the one national economy, from
the two-hundred reported in the World Bank ATLAS, which has done the best job
of protecting its environment. According to my reading of the W. B. ATLAS
data, on a per capita basis, Switzerland consumes only i/3rd. as much natural
resources as the United States. My thirty year old opinion, that the Swiss
know and practice methods of eco-efficiency of which Americans seem
oblivious, has been confirmed by only one frequent poster to list
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, that is, by [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christoph
Reuss).
If the world public were given their choice of moving toward a global economy
consisting of two-hundred larger Swiss ecomomies, or, moving toward a global
economy consisting of two-hundred smaller U.S. economies, a great majority of
the world public would vote for the Swiss model. But would the U.S. public
vote with the world majority? Probably not yet, but soon!
There is presently only one systemic defect of omission in the U.S. economy
which defines the difference in eco-efficiency between those two countries.
That defect is shown by the diamond at 5% of GNP for the U.S. (10% for the
Swiss) on Figure 1 of the Global Model at URL
<http://www.freespeech.org/darves/bert.html>. That is to say, the U.S.
public policy leaves half of the expense of replenishing its workforce in the
household budgets of parenting families, rather than in the public revenue
where it belongs, along with the expense of public education, which is the
other half of the expense of replenishing the nation's workforce.
This systemic defect of omission, this Teflon Topic supported openly by only
one American out of 260 million Americans, manifests itself as a 5% of GNP
perennial deficiency of purchasing power, regardless of the level or trend of
the GNP, as shown by Figure 8, the micro-model of the Global Model at URL
<http://www.freespeech.org/darves/bert.html>. Most of our serious reformers
on the internet acknowledge the existence of this perennial deficiency of
purchasing power in an industrial economy, and attribute it to excessive
debt, the interest (usury) on the debt, or some other defect in the nation's
banking or tax collecting system. But these are only symptoms of the defect.
The primary cause of every social pathology discussed in our churches, by
our media, or on the internet is our idea, backed up by legislation, that
children are an optional consumption expense of the parenting family. Plato
knew better!
One of the most reasonable and clearly presented examples of the conventional
wisdom is found in Section III of the Bank of Good Will web site at URL:
<http://www.bgw.net >, A Monetary System for the New Millennium
by Roger Langrick. Here is an excerpt from the beginning and end to
encourage you to read the whole presentation, which is the best I have seen.
>>>> Begin excerpts from "A Monetary System for the New Millennium" <<<<
Bank of Good Will,"Markus Helendahl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED], JCT,99-05-17
http://www.bgw.net
A Monetary System for the New Millennium
by Roger Langrick
The Debt Engine is a phrase to describe unrelenting, forever increasing
private and government debt. The need to stay ahead of escalating debt fuels
practically everything we do; it forces us out of bed in the morning to go to
jobs that most of us despise. Corporations make all their decisions around
first how to service their snowballing debt, and secondly around profit.
Governments spend all their time worrying about how to meet their social
agendas while at the same time servicing the increasing debtload of deficit
spending.
As a motivating force, the Debt Engine now exceeds all others in the insane
dash of the planet towards self destruction. Universal unrepayable debt
creates a social environment in which certain types of behavior flourish and
inhibits or destroys any tendency towards long term concerns and nourishment.
Unrepayable Debt is different than the everyday debt of normal life.
Unrepayable Debt is an actual built in flaw of our present monetary system:
The Fractional Reserve System. It benefits no-one except those intimately
connected with the banking industry and in spite of its devastating
repercussions, it is a flaw that can be fixed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> skip to conclusion <<<<<<<<<<<<<<
The Debt Engine has distorted the potential of the Industrial Revolution and
forced us into a narrow focus of marketplace ethic. A new monetary system
with enough government control to ensure funding of vital issues could unlock
the creative potential of the entire nation. By redirecting the focus of our
national economy, a new monetary system would enable men and women who can
think in terms of abundance not only for themselves, but how also to use it
for the benefit of the entire planet. I know John Law would approve
>>>> End excerpts from "A Monetary System for the New Millennium" <<<<
Do any of you innocents and lurkers truly believe that the intellectually
gifted frequent posters on these several mail lists are so intellectually
deprived that they cannot comprehend the basic "break-even" analysis
illustrated for the American workforce in Figure 8, The U.S. Systemic Defect
Of Omission? I don't.
Add to Figure 8 another radial line which is 11% below the tax line 0-b to
show the net interest (usury) on the 1993 national debt $12,341.5 billion.
That burden of debt service is distributed over the workforce by our bankers
according to each individual's ability to pay. Separate out the consumer
debt to leave only the 1993 Federal debt of $3,328.0 billion, Then separate
out the part of Federal debt purchased by the public with current income
(without creation of new money) to leave that part of the national debt which
is held by the banking system, was purchased with new money, and circulates
as M1, the medium of exchange for an economy with sales of $15,857.5 billion,
and a GNP of $6,343.3 billion, in 1993.
Figure 2-3 of the Global model shows the growth of M1 between 1959 and 1994,
with a decline over the last four years to 95% of the 1994 level, as noted in
a recent post. The U.S. Dollar and the U.S. monetary system works like a
bloody charm, and is one of the wonders of the world. Its defects (if any)
are neither an explanation of, nor an excuse for, the 5% of GNP perennial
deficiency of purchasing power which has been partially off-set in the
aggregate, but not in the detail, for the last fifty years by a 5% of GNP, or
more, expenditure on national defense.
How much of the first Tithe (10% of each nation's GNP) is presently being
invested by each of the two hundred nations reported in the World Bank's
ATLAS? !0% of each nation's GNP invested in the support and education of its
children would put all two hundred nations on the path to becoming a
Switzerland. Would the Swiss vote for that?
Think about it, and then talk anout it. I might be mistaken!
Kind regards,
WesBurt
