Posted To An RSA Video About Populism and Democracy

We’ll never have a semblance of democracy so long as we do not deal terminatedly with the dominance of Finance’s monopolistic paradigms of Debt and Loan ONLY. You do that by integrating the new monetary paradigm of Monetary Gifting intelligently into the digital money and pricing systems. And no, I’m not an interest is the only problem crank. The problem is that technologically advanced capital intensive economies INHERENTLY create a higher rate of flow of total costs/prices than they (even ideally, which never happens) simultaneously create a rate of flow of total individual incomes with which to liquidate such costs. Finance has been problematic and dominating for over 5000 years. It’s way over due for a paradigm change.

***************************************************************

Populism because it is largely anti-intellectual is third rate intellect. Orthodox liberalism and orthodox conservatism/libertarianism are all second rate intellects by virtue of their orthodoxy. In order to be a first rate intellect you have to be open to integrating only the truths, only the highest workabilities and applicabilities, only solutions as opposed to palliatives and only the highest possible ethical considerations in seeming opposite perspectives. As such integrative thinking is the very process of Wisdom itself that means in order to be a first rate intellect you have to utilize Wisdom. Hence what we need in politics, economics and money systems is Wisdom-Integration as defined above. wisdomicsblog.com

LF: Steve Hummel, very nice sounding words, meaning you want to seize the product of people’s labor and ban free exchanges. Wisdom? You’re a fool. Such a degree of government intervention is inevitably totalitarian, immoral and ineffective. Not even AI could avoid famine in such a corrupt system.

Me:  “you want to seize the product of people’s labor and ban free exchanges” Not correct and a mere reaction to what I am saying. I want profit making systems and individuals to be able to survive and thrive in INHERENTLY cost inflationary technologically advanced economies. If the lower bound of costs and so prices is inherently increasing due to the ever increasing depreciation costs of fixed capital assets (as well as other flows of costs) then the only way to overcome this systemic condition is via direct and reciprocal monetary Gifting. That’s monetary Gifting….NOT re-distributive taxation as I believe you have mistakenly assumed I meant. In fact Direct and Reciprocal monetary Gifting are the only way profit making systems are going to survive beyond another 10 years. “Such a degree of government intervention is inevitably totalitarian, immoral and ineffective.” Question: How can policies that will directly effect economic freedom for both the individual and enterprise possibly be considered tyranny?

LF:  And the thing about “feasible” jobs is that general increases in productivity change what we consider feasible. A full time writer is definitely unfeasible in an agricultural community, for instance. What we consider feasible today is based on whether or not a specific task reaches a level of productivity that justifies the minimum wage. As technology increases productivity, jobs that seem unfeasible today could very well become feasible. As long as people have any problems, needs or aspirations, and you can think of ways to help them, you’re in business.

Me:  You may be in business, at least for a little while, However, 80% of businesses go out of business within three years, and mostly not because of lousy business practices, but because of the macro-economic scarcity of individual incomes in ratio to macro-economic costs, and both this scarcity ratio and the instability it enforces can only increase with the disruptive forces of innovation and AI destroying aggregate incomes at a pace far surpassing any rate at which it has done so in the past. Old orthodoxies on both the left and right must get over themselves and we must have an integrative new theory and policies that combines their separate truths. wisdomicsblog.com

LF:  “People with nothing to do” implies all human needs and desires are met. This scenario is ludicrous, if you know anything about human nature.

Me:  You’re view of human nature is probably skewed by cultural factors you may not have entirely integrated with cutting edge psychology. You are correct that many people find purpose in employment. However, purpose is a much larger mindset than mere employment so the intelligent and rational thing to do would be to have a coalition of the helping professions, the clergy and the government with public service announcements like they used to have back in the 70’s that alerted people to the unhealthiness of smoking…to awaken people to the large number of positive, constructive self chosen purposes IN ADDITION TO EMPLOYMENT that would be available to them in an economy where they had abundant income and the leisure time to develop and enjoy them. And if we don’t do such a thing we’re simply being stubbornly orthodox and falling further behind the curve of change.

LF:  I’m not saying central planning because obviously that didn’t work. Something must be done because our current model of growth is overlapping the Earths ability to recover and replenish. Too much over fishing and over farming. Too much polluting coupled with climate change, we’re running out of freshwater. So many factors, all focusing on a scenario that doesn’t look very good. It’s scary what our kids and grand kids will have to endure. There’s going to come a point that it’s going to be about what’s best for the species and I don’t even know what the hell that means. I just know if things keep going as they are, I don’t see a good result.

Me:  Those are all understandable and reasonable considerations. However, if monetary scarcity and economic austerity are continually enforced on us we’re much more likely to blow ourselves to smithereens before we can utilize enlightened new paradigm financial and monetary thinking to finance innovative ways to do more with actually fewer resources. Intelligently implementing a new paradigm of monetary Gifting is the correct first step followed by such financing of innovation and AI.

LF: Monetary gifting + inflation means the value of savings decreases constantly, while money rains in. Ignoring huge problems I’ll go into, the real effect of this policy is very much like redistributive taxation.

Me: Lord F, “Monetary gifting + inflation means the value of savings decreases constantly, while money rains in.”

Please explain how there could possibly be price inflation if there was a 30-40% discount to every business model’s retail product throughout the entire economic process as well as at the business model of retail sale itself which is the terminal end of same?

LF: Monetary scarcity sounds like a bad thing, but it is in fact a necessary characteristic of a society that cares about the long term. A central bank that continually increases the money in circulation makes its value go down, and encourages short term spending instead of saving. As to price inflation, the only way I know to avoid it is bubbles and malinvestment. In this case, only prices of certain assets are inflated in the short run. I don’t understand your sentence about “discount to every business model’s retail product”, where does that come from, could you elaborate?

Me: “A central bank that continually increases the money in circulation makes its value go down,”

Yes, that is one of the ways we get price inflation, and it is precisely why we require a competitive monetary authority other than the FED to distribute the universal dividend Gifting policy and the reciprocated Gifting back of the retail discounts to the merchants who gave them to their consumers. (or we could mandate that the FED in fact also distribute these monies as Gifts).

The beauty of the retail product discount policy is that it utilizes the digital nature of the pricing system in order to increase both individual purchasing power and not only prevents price inflation, but if the discount percentage is high enough, does what has previously been considered impossible, that is, it unobtrusively and harmlessly integrates price deflation into profit making economic systems. In this sense the dual policies of the dividend and the retail product discount are actually also the perfect integration of/third alternative to the obsessively contentious opposing theories of Austrian and Keynesian economics.

Integration is Wisdom, and thorough integration results in Grace-fullness as in flow which in this case is the accomplishment of the classical and correct goal of economic theory.

wisdomicsblog.com

LF:  Steve Hummel, let me tell you why I think that wouldn’t work. Just to be clear, what you propose is a sort of negative VAT fueled by new monetary offerings, right?

You haven’t taken into account two forces that would produce price inflation if that policy was to be implemented: 1 – Overtime, the money in circulation does increase, because there is more money being made by retailers than money being spent by consumers. Inevitably, when more money is spent without an underlying increase in productivity, prices rise. 2 – A big contributor to the present value of money is future expected value of money. Smart agents in the economy would realize future price inflation and discount it today. Those who don’t realize future price inflation would create a bubble, by increasing their spending under the illusion of prosperity caused by a flood of new money. This results in over-leverage and malinvestment.

Besides, contrary to what I thought you meant before, you are actually not proposing a redistributive scheme at all, because those without much money wouldn’t be able to access the discounts offered throughout retail. So all this policy achieves is punishing those who save in fiat money, making it harder for financially naive families to come out of poverty through hard work alone. That’s my take on this.

Me:  “Just to be clear, what you propose is a sort of negative VAT fueled by new monetary offerings, right?”

Not correct. I’m proposing a new monetary paradigm of Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting.

“Overtime, the money in circulation does increase, because there is more money being made by retailers than money being spent by consumers. Inevitably, when more money is spent without an underlying increase in productivity, prices rise.”

Perhaps, when one does not take precise and yet unobtrusive control of a system that is unstable by virtue of the fact that it is inherently and increasingly cost inflationary, but if you DO take such control by implementing a 30-40% discount to prices at every “retail” exchange of product or service throughout the entire economic/productive process….then how are you going to have price inflation?…even if you had a measly 3% that got stuck in there by “blue smoke and mirror” cost accounting by greedy and anti-social enterprises???

“A big contributor to the present value of money is future expected value of money. Smart agents….”

Along with the transformative new monetary paradigm I’m talking about would also come rational and ethical regulation of the speculative and anti-social stupidities that people and enterprises in the business model of Finance have used to dominate and manipulate all other business models and probably 96+% of the general populace. Doing this would be Wisdom and ethics applied to a system that has been problematic for over 5000 years. I’d say we are waaaaay over due for ethical finance and an ethical economics as well.

“Besides, contrary to what I thought you meant before, you are actually not proposing a redistributive scheme at all,”

Correct. It’s a direct monetary and reciprocal price distributive paradigm which does not take the productivity of others via RE-distributive taxation.

“those without much money wouldn’t be able to access the discounts offered throughout retail.”

Sorry, not correct. That is one of the reasons for the universal monthly dividend policy. In fact a sufficient monthly dividend would do two things: Keep modern economies stable with more than adequate aggregate demand as innovation and artificial intelligence disruptively and increasingly destroy the same and Immediately make all transfer taxes for both the individual and enterprise for welfare, unemployment insurance and even quite rapidly for social security as well…..completely redundant…thus freeing both agents from such costs.

LF:  I’m sorry Steve, but you are making yourself extremely hard to understand. I’m honestly trying. How is the 30-40% discount to prices at retail enacted? Subsidizing every exchange? (extremely price inflationary) or is it price controls what you are proposing? What are these “anti-speculation” measures you want to introduce? Would you ban intermediaries in commerce? I say the ethical finance that is overdue is letting people exchange their labor and property freely. Pumping aggregate demand artificially, without prior healthy savings and investments, is the surest path to bubbles and inflation.

Me:  “I’m sorry Steve, but you are making yourself extremely hard to understand. I’m honestly trying.”

Good, I appreciate that, and this thread HAS gone on much longer than usual without ego and consequent emotional over reaction side tracking it so I compliment you for that as well. The fact is that I am trying to communicate the logistics of a paradigm change. Paradigms (old ones) are generally held beliefs in patterns, ideas etc. They are also habitual as a result. This makes understanding them generally very difficult. This is in no way an insult to your or anyone else’s intelligence, you are obviously very well informed, but the problem of trying to communicate a new idea/pattern remains.

“How is the 30-40% discount to prices at retail enacted? Subsidizing every exchange? (extremely price inflationary) or is it price controls what you are proposing?”

It’s obviously implemented via a political process about which I’m neither naive nor cynical about because cynicism is actually just a disguised apathy…especially when something as important and beneficial as an ethical and paradigmatic change to the economic and money systems is concerned.

The word “subsidizing” is an old paradigm general equilibrium theory loaded word in view of the fact that the best economists who saw the crisis of 2008 coming have de-bunked neo-liberal dynamic stochastic general equilibrium theories’ underpinning assumptions. Modern economies are in a continual state of disequilibrium due to the fact that they inherently create a greater rate of flow of total costs/prices in ratio to total individual incomes with which to liquidate those costs/prices. Hence a subsidy to the rate of flow of individual incomes THAT IS COSTLESSLY APPLIED….is required. That is also why monetary Gifting is the new monetary and economic paradigm.

“Price controls” is similarly an old paradigm loaded label. The fact is that the discount policy mechanism is strategically implemented at the precise places and times within the economic process where costs and prices for any product or service are terminally summed, and also ONLY at the precise moment where and when production is transformed into consumption…so there actually is no coercion or interference in competitive price discovery for any commercial entity….at all.

“What are these “anti-speculation” measures you want to introduce?”

Straight forward taxation for any de-stabilizing financial attempts at asset inflation, and the banning of outrageously idiotic forms of debt creation like MBS, CDS etc. etc.

Part of the paradigm problem is we have become so habituated to and hypnotized and blinded by Finance’s monopolistic paradigms of Debt and Loan ONLY….that we see no alternatives to them.

Costless individual monetary Gifting and reciprocal Gifting at point of retail sale utilize the digital nature of the costing, pricing and debt based money systems….to in fact transcend them and in so doing rectify modern economy’s deepest and least perceived problem, the monetary scarcity to cost/price ratio above.

“Pumping aggregate demand artificially, without prior healthy savings and investments, is the surest path to bubbles and inflation.”

Not with the new monetary paradigm of Gifting and not with the specific policies described above.

SO:  Resource Based Economy 🙂

Me:  I have no problem with the resource based economy so far as its thrust toward innovative technological means of cost and resource efficiencies are concerned. However, it is essential and important to keep in mind that it IS a monetary economy. Hence the policy solutions need to be monetary in NATURE. The monetary policies of Wisdomics/Gracenomics are necessary for the most efficient and fair distribution of income, for the necessary decentralization of the money power to both the individual and the cooperating enterprise, for the actual break up of the current dominating paradigms of private finance…and lastly to prevent jumping from the frying pan into the fire. That is, giving the individual and the cooperating enterprise the power with the policies…..not just trading private monopoly with public monopoly.

LF:  I have a problem with the supposed paradigm shifts you propose: Paradigm shifts are enabled by a truly new condition or tool that is introduced in a system. From there, all sorts of new ideas may arise, etc. The problem is, as far as I’ve understood, the policies you propose are not a paradigm shift. They are a mix of tried and tested policies, branded in a fresh new way. The reason why concepts like subsidies or price controls are such charged labels is not some philosophical reason. It’s their plain meaning and their consequences that make some of us wary of such policies, independent of people’s perception or enlightenment. I oppose price controls for the same reason I oppose slavery: two individuals should be allowed to trade freely. No paradigm shift makes slavery ok. Same goes for monetary gifting. The counter arguments I’ve presented do not depend on paradigms or any such ideas, they are honest brick and mortar economic logic. Anyway, I can also play the paradigm shift game: What about a society where people don’t wait for governments to organize safety nets or social programs, a society where people transcend greed, tribalism and envy, and share as much as their souls really call for, where different people have different paths for service, some through billionaire enterprises, some through ground work. Those few who don’t want to participate in this paradigm are free to trade and pursuit their happiness, and they won’t do any harm to others, because stealing and murdering aren’t allowed. Such society would respect people’s choices in allocating their resources, past and present, and everyone would contribute honestly and use money as the social cooperation tool that it should be. If we’re about shifting paradigms, why not transcend governments too?

Me:  Monetary Gifting and Wisdomics/Gracenomics as a theory is an entirely new monetary and economic idea and consciously applied set of policy tools. Why? Not because the idea of gifting itself is new, but within the body of knowledge of economics and certainly within the financial paradigms of private finance it is indeed a completely new idea and set of policies….as well as being completely anathema to the dominant structural force of the business model of Private Finance. Private Finance’s unethical dominance and manipulative powers is of course “the elephant in the room” that economists and pundits so often miss or dismiss. However, as every paradigm change/shift always has as its most important and most essential effect an elevation of ethics….such essential aspect cannot be ignored or diminished. Add to that the fact that the effects of economics and finance are basically ever present and extremely attention absorbing by both individuals and enterprise and one can easily see the depths of positive effect they will have if implemented. So far as their being a mix, that’s true, but they are a peculiar and particular mix known as an actual and thorough integration the result of which is both a thirdness and increased resolving unification of the entire matter under consideration. Such thirdness/unity/resolution is in fact the signature of paradigm change itself, and such signature is replete in logic, mathematics, human thought and throughout nature if one looks closely and comprehensively enough. As for your last two paragraphs, sorry, in an already imperfect world dominated by entrenched interests, leaving such alone by eliminating or ham stringing government is a non-starter. The flaw in libertarian logic is that its disdain for government is on the one hand largely accurate…..but irrationally general. If a government’s policies are in fact freeing for the individual (abundant dividend), for enterprise (relatively high discount policy) and for the entire system by virtue of the increased stabilization that occurs (the effect of implementation of both policies) ….how can that be characterized as tyrannical, onerous or in any way bad??? What libertarians, conservatives and liberals alike all need to do is look at the fact that the policies of Monetary Gifting and Wisdomics-Gracenomics would immediately accomplish more of the best of each of their agendas than they have been (un)able to effect in at least the last hundred years of obsessive and invalidative contention with each other. Left: economic democracy and monetary abundance, ethical elevation of the entire system Right: with sufficiently abundant dividend and discount policies the elimination of virtually all transfer taxes and the concomitant elimination of their bureaucracies Libertarian: the affirmation of their deepest belief in freedom for the individual and enterprise and of choice in all spheres most importantly in the economic, monetary and political systems, the actual accomplishment of same including freedom from an irrational generalization.

OS:  Steve Hummel There is no monopoly in a RBE. All physical resources will be allocated equally among the population. Optimization can be done to this system by feedback on how to allocate resources, such as online individual inquiries (demands) as a fine form of democracy (maybe rated by others), that is met by others similar to a project on common problems. Study topics and what to pursue in life will be purely based on what one finds meaningful in life, no more paid slavery. This will be all in the framework of the carrying capacity of the earth, and the priorities will be decided based on science (shelter, food, education, etc.), in order to maximize happiness. There is no room for a monopoly, because there is no bases for personal profit.

Me:  I wouldn’t necessarily disagree with any of the ideas or actions you posted, except that profit is not the correct and deepest why of the current problem. That and the fact that Wisdom/thorough integration/paradigm changes never eliminate any natural factors, but rather transform and transcend them while still including/allowing them, but only in their transformed/transcended forms.

LF:  Policymakers are there to keep us in the oil and avoid anyone jumping into the fire… while they eat the steak. Seriously now, I put together arguments against your proposed monetary policies a couple of comments ago, to which the main response was an appeal to a paradigm shift. I still believe monetary gifting is hugely price inflationary, creates bubbles, destroys the savings of working families while it rewards a few savvy investors, and is inherently immoral because it intrudes a realm of basic human exchange and basic life planning.

Me:  “Policymakers are there to keep us in the oil and avoid anyone jumping into the fire… while they eat the steak.”

Cynicism is not a valid critique, and is irrelevant to the resolution of any problem.

“I still believe monetary gifting is hugely price inflationary, creates bubbles, destroys the savings of working families while it rewards a few savvy investors, and is inherently immoral because it intrudes a realm of basic human exchange and basic life planning.”

With the retail product discount mechanism as described by myself price inflation IS impossible. If price deflation is accomplished throughout the entire economic/productive process at the exact moment of each enterprise’s terminal summing of their costs for any of their products or services….then individual enterprise and systemic price deflation will be the effect. Our current economic problems are resolved by integrating the new paradigm of Monetary Gifting.

The current monopolistically dominating financial and monetary paradigms ARE the problem. When you recognize that the rational and ethical way forward becomes much more clear.

 LM:  It is really difficult to decipher what you are saying Steve, but i like the depth of its suggestions and your condensed and thorough form (that’s probably why i can’t understand though). I may just be having a mental hazy when trying to simulate these concepts. So, i’ll just repeat some impressions and have you say yes or no. Keep any corrections small please. Monetary gifting & discounting thingy = If a company gives stuff away, the government/policy makers will reduce their taxes or artificially lower their retail prices by subsidizing them. That latter part is what is confusing me, as i don’t see why that distinction is important, what strange use it has, isn’t that the same thing as a tax reduction or some kinda tax return? Are all company taxes going to be replaced by individual income taxes only or something similar that will make this difference matter? Anyways, the companies will be gifting to the needy or those within the scope of that Wisdomics/Gracenomics symbiosis with the economy (determined by policy makers ++) and/or the giver. Like i said, i haven’t been able to simulate much of this or that, not even for the end result of this system.
Me:  (Caps are for emphasis only, not yelling) Monetary Gifting and the Discount policy do not consist of giving any product or service away. The universal dividend is indeed a gift of money distributed directly to the individual, probably monthly, that would be in addition to any money they made via work for pay. The Discount policy would be a percentage rate reduction to each businesses product and/or service AFTER AND ONLY AFTER THEY HAVE ALREADY DISCOVERED THEIR BEST COMPETITIVE PRICE FOR ANY ITEM and ONLY at the point that a sale has actually been concluded AND THEN THE ENTIRETY of a businesses discounts to the consumer…ARE REBATED BACK to them BY A MONETARY AUTHORITY SPECIFICALLY MANDATED to distribute both the dividend policy to individuals and the discounts back to the merchants. If you accomplish both increased demand AND price deflation at the same time which is the obvious effect of these two policies it’s a prescription for a free flowing economy that is no longer addicted to ONLY Debt, as it is now, in order to attempt (and lose) the battle to keep the economy’s nose above water.
People are accustomed to think that adding money to the economy is inflationary. Actually monetary inflation is less the fact and less virulent than cost inflation due to the ever increasing additional costs of depreciation. Regardless, by taking adult and responsible control of both the level of individual incomes with the dividend policy AND unobtrusive control of the pricing system with the retail product discount policy….you actually take gracious and beneficial control of both ends of the entire economic system…and everything in between as well. This is in contrast to the current system where private Finance’s de-stabilizing paradigms of Debt and Loan ONLY are unchallenged and the unfortunate belief that markets clear and tend toward general equilibrium is also generally believed when history has severely reminded us at least twice in the last century that such is not the case. And so the market worshiping belief that “we must not try to control the economy” persists….even if there are intelligently crafted policies as per above that would free the individual, enterprise and the entire system.
LM:   Thank you a lot. The definition was simply obscured to me by too many corrections and a subtle blind spot to its usefulness. It should work great! I don’t see any huge problems with it. Though I believe that blind spot originates from the way it looks like an arbitrary rebranding of a subsidy (obviously distinctly different and superior upon proper understanding).
That retail discount is a unique policy I have never heard of before. Oh, I think your last explaination was best, too much fancy wording in the others.
Me:  Yes, any change, particularly a paradigmatic change is misunderstood by orthodoxy. That in no way diminishes this analysis. The truth is economists have been very poor observers. They are great at abstract theoretics, but they are largely ignorant of the actual workings of the economy. Thus they do not perceive that both the money and pricing systems are digital in nature, that is money cancels both debt and prices. This is why the reciprocal gifting process of the discount/rebate mechanism works and enables what has been considered impossible in profit making systems, that is conscious price deflation. They also do not perceive that the costs of depreciation of ever increasing fixed capital appreciation in modern economies are continually pushing up the lower bound of costs and so creates a basic de-stabilization of the system. When you look directly at how the process of commerce operates day to day the policy solutions of monetary Gifting become simple and obvious.
F:  LordF Oh let me be clear, I’m not taking a stance on behalf of the basic income argument. I disagree with that economic philosophy for other reasons. I’m just speaking on the abundances of AI devices that we’ll have all interconnected via the internet, in the near future. That to me should be the paramount issue, as that could potentially lead to imminent disaster. In terms of the basic income talk, that will lead to various issues much too long for a youtube comment. But I’ll list my top 3 reasons I don’t agree with basic income: #1 Economic – It could stifle innovation and lead to a lack of capitalist competition #2 Political – With reasons pertaining to #1, tech companies such as Google would become much too powerful #3 Ethical – Who will determine the quality of life for the masses? Sure, not working and dicking around all day sounds great to a slacker. But what do you do when your rations are cut, and you have no means of upwards mobility in society? A successful society will ALWAYS encourage and reward a good work ethic.
Me:  Fermion, Purpose is all important in Life. The problem is the failed experiment with homo economicus, economic man is still the ingrained and overlaid false paradigm instead of cultivating homo sapiens, wise and discerning man. Employment as purpose is but a small subset of total possible fulfilling purposes. Who administers is not nearly as important as the philosophy and aligned policies they are administering. Perhaps we should search for a natural philosophical concept that integrates positive purpose and a sense of ethics like grace-graciousness for example….and make that the new monetary and economic paradigm as well as the new ethic-zeitgeist.
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s