The economic system is utterly embedded in the physical/temporal universe. Thus, even completely unregulated and operated in the highest possibly efficient manner,  it is bound to and by the laws of thermo-dynamics which in turn means that it is inherently cost inflationary due to enforced increase in energy needed to maintain itself.  The Financial System on the other hand is based in an idea/an abstraction, namely money which is not subject to the laws of thermo-dynamics. The lack of distinction between the two has allowed the latter to perform a sleight of hand that turns what could be direct and ever increasing individual economic freedom and systemic free flowingness into a system of dominance, self interested profit seeking and control where the non-entropic nature and freeing power of money is not allowed to reach the individual except via ever more diminishing employment which is again subject to the cost inflationary nature of the temporal universe and/or only via the enforced costs of Finance. Integrating the non-entropic powers of money into the economic system with policies  that are direct, immediate, continuous and freeing to the individual is the answer to our present increasing economic entropy.

After one has satisfactorily determined that inherent additional costs are a reality right along with inevitable diminutions of same from the circular flow, and  that one cannot remedy the problem this causes by simply injecting more and more money into the system because it re-initiates the problem….another problem can arise of not fully perceiving the efficacy and macro-economic power of the Social Credit policy mechanisms. Orthodox thinking regarding equilibrium can begin to creep in and pecuniary notions about the amount of the Dividend or percentage of the Discount can actually snatch failure from the mouth of victory. One has to think that if the system has persisted in a state of individual monetary scarcity for so long and yet survived….how much better could it be if an abundant income that aligns with Social Credit’s key philosophical concept of Grace was immediately made the reality. Perfect statistical and/or macro-economic equilibrium is likely not possible, but the + and – aspects of the Dividend and Discount policies perfectly reflects the creditary nature of the money system, perfectly addresses the key disequilibrating metric and also perfectly reflects the component parts of an equilibrium as in balance as well. But why be obsessive about numerical equilibrium which Douglas himself said was virtually impossible and incorrect because of the inherent scarcity of the economy. Instead we should align the Dividend and Discount effects with abundance which reflects Grace as in abundance. The more individual income the less need for borrowing. The lower prices are the closer we are to the money system being a ticketing system for the distribution of production. More is almost always better and ascendant. That’s why Grace is higher, superlative and abundant.

We should be completely tolerant of our own and other’s beingness, without necessarily being tolerant of our/their doingness of course, as imperfection is an endemic condition of being human. Integrating Grace as in granting of beingness and Grace as in ethics which is the rational consideration of morals is one of the top, if not the top task of humans.

The physical reality is actually a constant and continuous electro-magnetic emanation/emanating change/process from every object, sensory differentiation and from space itself. Getting “on the same wavelength” as this is likely what the state/experience of Grace actually is.

Focusing one’s attention on present time is probably the best way to attune oneself to these potential experiences and this has been a part of many of the world’s wisdom traditions best exemplified by the Zen Buddhist tradition.

The newness of nowness is an exhilarating revelation in comparison to the dullness of the habitual “garden variety” state of consciousness we moderns are habituated/accustomed to and that passes as normal. A good breaking up of this mode of consciousness would not only be a relief it would be enligtening, and an integration of the two modes an optimal state of mind.

As Grace/the flow state is a heightened, intense and effortlessly focused state of consciousness aware of the utter actual chaos that is the present moment in the temporal universe, and economic theory’s classical goals are balance, equilibrium and flow despite the chaos/complexity of the economy….these two seem to be aligned with each other. A study of the aspects of Grace/the flow state is probably a good start.

As people can go an entire life time without cogniting on the fact that they actually are in fact conscious beings, so economics has gone on studying the economy without the benefit of understanding that increased consciousness might be beneficial in perceiving its deeper realities and workings. The elegance contained in simplicity is most often best perceived through the depth of Wisdom and via it’s pinnacle concept and experience again which is the conscious experience known as Grace/Flow/Consciousness.

Abstraction is fragmented, compartmentalized objective simplification. An intensely focused consciousness of multipli-complex/chaotic process as in flow of the temporal universe is holistic,integrative and subjective. Perhaps an integration of these two modes is what is called for in order to better understand and illuminate economics and economic theory.

Me:  It sloshes around inside the system…..but is never simultaneously actually in the hands of consumers so that they can liquidate total costs/prices…moment to moment. It’s a dog chasing its tail…but never reaching it.

Or rather, that describes the reality created by the continual borrowing made “necessary” by the disequilibrating excess costs to individual incomes created metric….that is the systemic reality enforced by the cost accounting convention that ALL costs must go into price. If you’d just distribute the dividend and implement the price discount so much borrowing would not be “necessary” any more.

Ellen:  Sloshes around where? Not following.  Sure. I just don’t think it needs to be called A+B. I can’t write about that.

Me:  Right you could just say that there is the reality of a costing/pricing system that every enterprise must adhere to that means more costs are created as a flow than individual incomes are simultaneously created. It’s like “trickle down economics” that the conservative/libertarian economists forget destabilizes the economy. The costing pricing system is also like the “blood/brain barrier” where total money/costs becomes less individual incomes than  total costs/prices.  And the velocity of money is meaningless because even if money re-circulates the blood/brain barrier still re-creates the scarcity ratio between total cost/prices and individual incomes.

Me:  Economists do not see the system as it actually is because they do not know accounting or the conventions of cost accounting, and the private financial powers are unwilling to give up their monopoly hold on the monopoly idea of “Loan Only” that is their unbalanced and self interested way of making profit.

Me:  It is encouraging that the idea of a supplementary income is required to remedy the economy’s inherent scarce production of same, and that is how it should be understood, that is, as an endemic problem with the system itself. Thus action/policy is required….not quasi-religious worship of capitalism or socialism, and action as in crafting policy that directly addresses the problem instead of only injecting money into the economy via enterprises and thus still does not actually resolve the the matter because it simply re-initiates the problem.

It’s analogous to the problems/reasons we had a Protestant Reformation. Instead of understanding that God was accessible directly by individuals instead of only via the church sacraments, monetary grace as in Gifting directly to the individual is the costless and hence economically valid policy that is required for an actual solution.

I’ve determined that the best way to communicate with bright but still Social Credit non-comprehending economists like Steve Keen is to couch it in terms they have recently discovered as true. For instance Keen has discovered disequilibrium as the general state of the economy as opposed to DSGE (Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium) theory.  Hence if we say to him, you’re right the economy IS in a state of continual disequilibrium because as a flow more costs of whatever kind including increasing capital depreciation costs as the economy becomes more technologically advanced. So, if we simply reverse the reality of this most basic economic metric and reality (costs exceed individual incomes simultaneously created) into individual income abundance and price deflation with a dividend that approaches a middle class income level and a retail discount percentage to prices that is high enough to create price deflation and that is rebated back to merchants…..we will have a mirror image metric and economic reality that we can call “the higher individually freeing and systemically free flowing disequilibrium”.

And of course, as ever increasing leisure would be the result of such policies….in order to avoid the possibility of habitual entitlement and sloth (not necessarily the inevitability with the vast majority of relatively balanced individuals)  a cooperative effort by private institutions and public service anouncements/education would seem to be a positive and foreseeing effort.

Cynicism is not a critique of the truth. And Old Guy….neither is puritanism. If a business takes out a loan of $1million to buy/create productive means and facilities that costs $600k they have to make $1 million PLUS $600k to replace their productive capability plus interest from the prices they charge their customers, or when those productive means wear out or become obsolete go to the Bank and take out ANOTHER loan to stay in business….and that probably means bye, bye business. Wake up! Social Credit is the only theory that accurately considers this concrete cost accounting reality and offers a systemic solution for it.

In other words you conservative/puritanically moralistic/austerian theorists are unwilling/incapable of seeing the inherently destabilizing effects of depreciation costs as well as the diminutions of income from the circular flow. Just drop the habitual/obsessive moralizing and look at the system AS IT ACTUALLY IS!!!