An Integration is…a mental combination of only truth(s), only workabilities and only applicabilities, and regarding policy only the most ethical, most inclusive and most encompassing ones.
The “Only This For That” Mindset
Jewish people are people. That is an essential understanding to come to. What is actually the problem is the legalistic underlying mindset mistakenly adhering to Debt created ex nihilo of “only this for that”, i.e. only money along with interest, which is only economically and financially valid for savings and profit being lent…if then.
In fact “only this for that” as in “only money from Debt/Loans” and “only money from employment” despite the combined cost inflationary nature of commerce and innovation and AI also increasingly and disruptively destroying individual incomes at the same time….is the linchpin consideration inhibiting a policy of monetary grace/monetary gifting from becoming the new consumer financial paradigm that ushers in a modern technologically advanced and stably abundant economy for all.
Grace/Abundance: Visualization and Transformation First!
Steven,
You’ve actually put your finger on why Social Credit of the kind John Rawson espouses will snatch an austere defeat from the mouth of an abundant victory and why the abundant addition to individual incomes via a middleclass dividend and a price deflationary macro-economic/aggregate discount to prices…are necessary.
Scarcity, spareness and meagerness still reside within the mindset and paradigms of Debt and Loan ONLY
The way to defeat Scarcity and the paradigms of Debt and Loan ONLY is to proactively and abundantly compensate for them with the equilibrating macro-economic tools of a universal dividend and rebated back to merchants retail discount. Then it will quickly be recognized just how inefficient, monopolistic and parasitic the business model of Finance has become, and also how inefficient, silly and fraudulent a governmental re-distributive taxation policy actually is. Such clarity will better enable the commercial sphere and the community at large to awaken and form an alliance to replace Finance’s monopolistic powers with much more efficient and yet still profitable operations (fee for accounting service), and also eliminate transfer taxes for welfare, unemployment insurance and even social security as well as their attending governmental bureaucracies that the above abundant and directly Distributive policies have then made obviously redundant.
Visualizing and proactively implementing a new abundant and more inclusive and encompassing paradigm clears the mind to better see such inefficiencies, asymmetries of power and self defeating policies. Then, AFTER the transformational and abundant changes have been implemented some slight reductions may be made that will still enable an abundant economic individual freedom to remain the reality. Grace is abundant/abundance and direct/directness, and frees the individual to see it more clearly so as to pursue systemic efficiency and better understand and cooperate with an overall ethic of ecological balance as well.
A primary paradigm of Grace/graciousness/gifting applied to the economic and monetary systems is larger, more free, more sane, more ethical and last but most importantly actually transformational of such systems. So much so that it can still include and better deal with limiting and tempting factors like scarcity, debt, profit, power and control.
Visualization and Transformation first…makes the path toward rational and ethical systemic regulation….more clear and more likely.
Reaction to the beauty and power of a video of a rescued abused puppy
I’ve seen this before, but it doesn’t matter…it just keeps on giving. Grace as in active loving and giving freely never lessens its effects, never expires…no matter where or how it is applied.
Replies to John Rawson
As per usual your misunderstandings about the nature and effects of a truly macro-economic/aggregate discount policy are showing in your problems with the the Discount mechanism. The fact is there is no difference between the “just price” and your “refund-to-retailers” monikers. A macro-economic discount would be very large (50%+) enabling price deflation, not just some mistaken chintzy 3% derived from under stated/untrustworthy governmental BS inflationary statistics. As for retailers “taking advantage”, they of course risk competitive taking of their market share. Competition in a profit making system will never not be in effect. And if they (retailers) take a little more profit who cares…because as Steve Keen just said in his latest video when business profits are good they use less financing for continuing operations, but when profits are low they use finance to make up for it. With the combination of increased spending from the dividend and the large discount percentage (applied to each item by an equal percentage) Finance as a business model will be downsized to just another business model instead of the suffocatingly dominant one it is now.
***********************************************************************************
Of course I agree with the collaborative spirit of the post, but the misunderstanding regarding a truly macro-economic (as in totals/aggregates) ability to reduce prices with the Discount percentage muddies the waters about its economic and monetary resolving powers. Reference my post in the other thread.
I DO agree that gracious but effective financial regulations similar in fact to the Discount mechanism (which is a regulation businesses “cannot refuse”) might also be used to discourage finance’s proclivities for encouraging economic vices like Rentiering etc. For instance savings and profits put into bond funds could be taxed at say 50-60% and that amount earmarked for investment in research on how to produce more for less resources or other similar ecologically sane projects, or just give the individual/business the option to do the same with minimal if any taxation.
As I have said numerous times here my motto is:
Transformation First! Rational and ethical regulation…right along with it.
**************************************************************************************
Answering John’s call for me to explain:
John,
I just did explain it. And I could give a shit if the billionaires get 50% off their yachts and jets or whatevers. That’s a one off drop in the bucket macro-economically. The Discount percentage is derived from aggregates…there’s NO NEED to calculate every product and service separately because the same percentage is discounted for every retail product and service. In other words a product worth $.50 with a 50% discount is purchased for $.25. A $15,000 automobile becomes $7500.
You forget John that unlike the micro-economy which is ruled by the necessities to consider cost and debt, to the macro-economy everything over and above original finance costs…is basically irrelevant waste and can be reduced using the digital nature of the money system to create an abundant equilibrium via the costless dividend and price deflation via the discount….at the same time. The macro-economy is about aggregates, numbers…that is all. Now you’re not alone in missing this, that is for sure. Virtually every economist extant, even the good ones like Keen and Hudson STILL have their heads about half way up the backside of the paradigms of Debt and Loan ONLY. Ideas/paradigms rule human minds and shape reality…and digital monetary grace has been there for 90+ years for everyone to discover.
You’re right though, something terrible might happen if people begin to awaken to the uses of macro-economic tools in a digital monetary system….like the end of the rule by Finance over everyone and every other business model for instance.
*****************************************************************************************
Hmmm, let’s see Auto maker A sells his car for $15,000 and the discount makes it $7500 to the consumer. Automaker B sells his $15,000 car for $18,000 and the discount makes it $9000. Now how many times is he going to get away with that before no one comes to his dealership and buys a car when they can buy the same one for $1500 less??????
“I am not interested in your alimentary problems in relation to the obvious fact that, these days, about 80% of any discount value would go to about the top 5% of the people.”
First of all that statement is ad hominem derision which last time I looked was grounds for banning here and most reputable lists.
Secondly it is a complete falsehood. The Discount is a RETAIL Discount. It’s at RETAIL SALE…where all costs including all profit, savings, interest, depreciation etc. ….have already been terminatedly summed for each and every product and service, and so who could possibly be harmed by discounting the totality percentage of those extractions of money and excess costs??? …especially seeings how they are all rebated back to the retailer so he/she can be whole on THEIR profits and overhead payments also.
No John, it is you who have misunderstandings about the nature and capabilities of Social Credit’s macro-economic policies. And you persist in spreading that misunderstanding. That is why you got moderated on the Social Credit list. A moderation, I actually opposed by the way.
The real problem here is John and other New Zealander Social Crediters, mostly because they were themselves still too much in the grasp of the paradigms of Debt and Loans ONLY and thus did not have/did not use valid macro-economic examples to counter derisive comments, and so were cruelly victimized by pols in sway to the Banking and Financial lobbies …and John has never gotten over that. Then add to that he also retains some of the falsehoods/vices of other economic theories as well as has never quite grasped the true power and nature of macro-economic/aggregate policies like the Dividend and Discount…especially when they are combined with the workings and digital plus and minus nature of our monetary system.
Old paradigms are hard to see through and new paradigms are usually hard to get one’s mind around…but when one sees them clearly and completely…they are incredibly powerful….and wipe away all of the orthodox dross that has hidden and inhibited them.
John Rawson: “Both the messages below seem to me to be to be perfect examples of the sort of digressions we should get away from if we are to get anywhere.”
Me: That’s like saying that ideas and generally held ideas like paradigms are not important in understanding, or relevant to accurate assessment of the truth in issues. If you want significant change, become aware of and change the idea/paradigm. If you want futility and the continuance of a dominating paradigm go small, go reform and go compromise on the unethical nature of that dominating paradigm.
Post That Actually Got Past the Censors at Real World Economic Review Blog
Excellent post. What economists need to do is craft policies that will by their very nature guarantee individual economic freedom without incurring an additional cost..like a universal and costless gift to individuals for instance, and that utilize the digital nature of the money system to avoid inflation and/or even create price deflation, like a macro-aggregately derived discount to retail prices to consumers that is rebated back to participating merchants. Policies that cause freedom…are freeing. A = A.
Posted to Mish Shedlock’s, Steve Keen’s and Ellen Brown’s Forums
Also posted to Mish Shedlock’s blog and Steve Keen’s latest youtube video:
Every economist and pundit is a nascent social crediter…and you’re only blowing smoke if you think AI and Robotics isn’t proof. The inexorable logics of profit making systems, innovation and AI/Robotics is each efficiency. Profits efficiency of cost (think labor costs), innovation efficiency of effort and AI/Robotics efficiency of human input at all. You’re not going to stop any of these outside of transforming the paradigm of Debt with a new consumer financial paradigm of monetary grace the free gift.
And the truly ironic thing is that both Austrians-libertarians and all other advocates of profit making systems who also can’t seem to see past the paradigm of Debt….are actually unconsciously working FOR a socialist work state. Mish and his buddy Steve Keen are both unconscious socialists. Sorry to burst your mutual orthodox bubbles, and you can block me and scorn me all you want, but without the above new paradigm you aren’t going to be able to avoid that truth and that inevitable trend. Its either the leisure society or the vulgar, dominating and manipulative future of the triumph of socialism, Finance and their paradigm of Debt.
Examples of Cosmic Code/Wisdom/Grace/Completeness/Integration Formula Applied to Problems of Economics and Money Systems
[ (Increasing Debt X Increasing Asset Cost) X Jubilee/Forgiveness ] Integrative Solution Following a Credit Bubble
[ (Univ. Dividend X Retail Discounts to Consumers) X Econ. Equilibrium ] Integrative Ongoing Individual & Systemic Solution
[ (Increasing Monetary/Asset Costs X Increasing Commercial Costs) X Ascending Costs ] Integrating Truths of Monetary & Cost Inflation
[ (Increasing Cost/Prices X Increasing Money-Debt/Prices) X Disquilibrium ] Necessary Macro-economic Equilbration Policy
[ (Micro/Profit X Macro/Equilibration) X Equilibrium ] Integrating Paradigms and Purposes of Micro and Macro-economics
[ (Debit X Credit) X Intrinsic Cost Inflation ] Apparency of Debit, Credit Equilibrium, but actual Intrinsic Disequilibrium
[ (Debit X Credit) X Cost Accounting Datums ] Surface Apparency of Debit, Credit Equiilibrium, but actual Intrinsic Disequilibrium
Deception/Incompleteness of Un-Integrated Duality/Apparencies
Duality is the apparancy of Life and Living. Trinity is the full reality of Human Life and Human Living/Human Systems. Settling for a Duality as an ultimate reality is mistaken, and in the end productive of much more conflict than significant and actual insight. Focusing on opposition instead of on Integration/Wisdom of the Duality is a dead end leading to authoritarianism and dogmatic orthodoxy. The Trinitarian Aspect of the Formula will always be the complete Truth, the Actuality, the Actual Solution to the Actual Problem, an Aspect of Grace.
Non-Integrative Examples of Duality: (Science, Religion) (Marxism, Capitalism) (Equilibrium, Disequilibrium) (Debit, Credit) (Diminutions of money, Additional costs) This Duality is actually Keynesianism vs Austrianism and the integration of the Duality is the Social Credit insight that both must be integrated/accounted/compensated for as follows:
[ (Diminutions of money X Additional costs) X Social Credit ]
Other Examples of Reactions/Incomplete Duality/Premature claims of ultimate truth vs Integrations:
(Marxism, Capitalism) Non-integrative Reactionary nonsense from both/either side
(Minsky) Incomplete Duality heading towards Premature claim of ultimate reality (Disequilibrium)
(DSGE) Premature claim of ultimate reality (Equilibrium)
(Keynesianism) Premature claim of ultimate reality (Diminution/Extraction of money from circular flow)
(Austrianism) Premature claim of ultimate reality (Excess costs)
(Georgism) Premature claim of ultimate reality (Diminution/Extraction of money from the circular flow)
(Financialism) Premature claim of ultimate reality (Diminution/Extraction of money from the circular flow)
Example of an Integration/Completion of Duality within the Trinity Formula:
[ (Marxism’s intention of economic democracy X Capitalism’s dynamism and profit) X Social Credit An Integration of Economic Democracy and Profit/Dynamism ]
It will be found that Social Credit’s philosophy of monetary grace/monetary gifting and its Dual policy mechanisms will be the integrative and Trinitarian aspect.
Example: [ (Keynesianism X Austrianism) X Social Credit ] ….which with its Dual policies of a universal dividend and retail discount is the integration of the minus insight of Keynesiamism and the excess costs insight of Austrianism.
Social Credit’s dual mechanisms are themselves the actual integrations necessary, the anatomy and component parts of economic equilibrium and for the next evolutionary step for Economic Theory
[ (Dividend + X Retail Discount – ) X Social Credit ]
The Problems of Perceiving a New Paradigm and the Conflicts That Can Arise Between Reformers and New Paradigmers
Overwhelmingly economists and money reformers are well intentioned and intelligent people. There can be no doubt of that. But ideas and dominant paradigms have a way of rendering well intentioned and intelligent people stupid, weak willed and ill intentioned toward those who actually have made the transition to a new paradigm. Why is this? Well, first of all paradigms are really difficult things to see because old paradigms have been so long in force and so their way of thinking and/or acting has become habitual. Secondly, new paradigms are often entirely different ideas/directions/policies than any ever applied to the discipline. In fact the new idea/paradigm may appear utterly irrelevant, ridiculous and absurd to those who still reside within the mindset of the old idea/paradigm. Thirdly, and related to the first, paradigms are generally held truths in the minds of most people and therefore more difficult to penetrate the orthodoxies holding the old paradigm in place. Fourth, being able to see a new idea/paradigm is not always the result of a rational, logical or even scholarly process. In fact it is very often more a combination of luck, circumstance and simple perseverance than it is the aforementioned normal intellectual process. It is usually true that people seeing the new paradigm have learned much of the discipline(s) that the new idea/paradigm is being applied to simply because they have persisted. This can make those prone to authoritarianism reject those advocating the new paradigm. Sometimes colleagues or even complete strangers can “whisper in the ear” of an otherwise open minded seeker and convince them that someone is a fanatic, an idiot or trying to glom onto the fame and/or attention of that seeker in some unethical or unfair way. This of course inhibits the open mindedness and expansionary mindset of that otherwise diligent seeker. One must always “keep their own counsel” especially regarding ideas and paradigms.
So communicating a new paradigm is an inherently difficult task.
Define characteristics of new paradigms inclusive, expansionary, oppositional/absurd to current orthodoxies (and invariably when the new paradigm is perceived the old paradigm is indeed immediately recognized as the absurd belief), pull in people’s unconscious biases/false orthodoxies from actually unrelated disciplines, stimulate others mistaken/moralistic ideas about Life and living (the new paradigm invariably is a more humane and more ethically sensitive way of doing things), no matter how iconoclastic one may be and how much one has thought through and/or de-bunked previous orthodoxies, if they do not recognize and make the paradigmatic shift….they’re thinking remains less inclusive, incomplete and in fact still thoroughly orthodox. Paradigm changes are all encompassing and transformational both mentally and temporally….by nature. Paradigm changes almost always reflect and share close linguistic similarities with religious/spiritual terms and concepts and/or incorporate non traditional ways of visualizing and operating like imagination, play, humor, reversal of thinking and acting.
The Stupidity and Unconsciousness of Macro-economists
They are still confounded by the paradigms of Debt ONLY and the System ONLY. So much so that they in fact don’t realize that theirs is the task of creating policies which will enable and maintain equilibrium….or even a more abundant equilibrium for the individual and a continual progression toward price deflation so that money eventually becomes a ticket for the distribution of production…that technology has been attempting to produce for well over 100 years, but Finance and its paradigm of Debt ONLY has usurped from the community at large.
Social Credit/Wisdomics/Gracenomics/ Gracientialism 