The money system

[craft]

Another Charles Eisenstein Video on Money and how it is intertwined.

It’s nearly two hours but if you’ve got the time to spare, I highly recommend it as a thought provoker.


Part 1


Part 2

 

[Value Collector]

A bit of vision around an end to the growth paradigm.

Acceptance that growth is not necessary for an enriched life is a stepping stone to redesigning the money system to work efficiently without growth.

]

In a world where Billions still live below the poverty line, with limited access to fresh water, shelter, food and health care, I think global economic growth is very much needed to enrich the lives of those people.

People die of simple things like starvation and disease simply because the global economy has not expanded to the point where they are included yet, we have a long way to go.

People will bring up problems, such as your references to a finite world and I am the first to admit there will be problems, But I don't think any of them are insurmountable, We will find ways around them, humans are very good at that, and fortunes will be made in the process.

 

[craft]

In a world where Billions still live below the poverty line, with limited access to fresh water, shelter, food and health care, I think global economic growth is very much needed to enrich the lives of those people.

People die of simple things like starvation and disease simply because the global economy has not expanded to the point where they are included yet, we have a long way to go.

People will bring up problems, such as your references to a finite world and I am the first to admit there will be problems, But I don't think any of them are insurmountable, We will find ways around them, humans are very good at that, and fortunes will be made in the process.

Do we need more growth to fix those things? or a better way of delivery and distribution? Growth is now coming at an exorbitant cost and lowering quality of life on an overall basis so how can more growth improve quality of life overall.

I also don't think things are insurmountable, but I do think we are going to have to align our money system better to the reality of finite growth and to deal with issues of financial concentration.

 

[Value Collector]

Here is a talk from Bill Gates on the Innovations needed to improve lives and the environment, He outlines how through innovations we will be able to produce more goods and services to raise global living standards, while also reducing impact.

 

[craft]

Here is a talk from Bill Gates on the Innovations needed to improve lives and the environment, He outlines how through innovations we will be able to produce more goods and services to raise global living standards, while also reducing impact.

Thanks for the video


I agree

Trick will be to do it in a way that still drives technology /social /cultural advancements etc to make life better whilst laying off the plundering of nature.

We can and should do the sort of things he talks about and innovation and efficiency are imperative. But note he still talks about research funding, cost issues and imposed price signals.

My point is that we are fighting the current money system to get these things done.

One saving grace for me with the concentration of wealth that the current system creates is how some at the top like Bill Gates have decided not to consume ridiculously but to use their control of money to try and plug the holes left by the system that created the money.

 

[Value Collector]

Do we need more growth to fix those things? or a better way of delivery and distribution?

Yes, we need more growth.

We need more Dams, water pipelines, power lines, power plants, hospitals, ports, roads, bridges, trucks, ships, planes, railways, phone towers, fibreoptic cables etc etc. the list is endless.

Offcourse delivery and distribution is a big part of growth, its hard to distribute water without pipelines, food without roads and refrigeration, education without libraries and the internet etc.

Developed countries have most of those things, but will need more incrementally, But even developed countries have room to grow when it comes to areas of scientific advancement, Design, education and many service industries.

I don't see a future where we a limited and have to sit in the dark, In 100years from now, I think the products and services available globally will be far more than we have now.

 

[sptrawler]

In a world where Billions still live below the poverty line, with limited access to fresh water, shelter, food and health care, I think global economic growth is very much needed to enrich the lives of those people.

People die of simple things like starvation and disease simply because the global economy has not expanded to the point where they are included yet, we have a long way to go.

People will bring up problems, such as your references to a finite world and I am the first to admit there will be problems, But I don't think any of them are insurmountable, We will find ways around them, humans are very good at that, and fortunes will be made in the process.

When there is no poverty, where everyone lives to extremely old age and there are no children dying. We won't be able to feed them.
Even if we can feed them, the problem perpentuates and becomes a bigger problem.lol

 

[Valued]

When there is no poverty, where everyone lives to extremely old age and there are no children dying. We won't be able to feed them.
Even if we can feed them, the problem perpentuates and becomes a bigger problem.lol

If we can't feed everyone then arn't the people not being fed in poverty? Then don't you have a divide between the haves and the have nots? Wouldn't the starving people end up dying, fixing the population issue?

 

[Value Collector]

When there is no poverty, where everyone lives to extremely old age and there are no children dying. We won't be able to feed them.
Even if we can feed them, the problem perpentuates and becomes a bigger problem.lol

Why wouldn't we be able to feed them.

The problem at the moment is not a lack of farmland, water or technology, It is a problem caused by a global economy that is still fragmented and disjointed. Millions of people live outside of the developed economy so they live in poverty, these are people that could contribute to the global economy if they had the basic infrastructure we take for granted.

But I for one welcome any problems we get that would be caused by no children dying and people living disease free into extreme old age, Because I think those problems would be solved too.

 

[Trembling Hand]

When there is no poverty, where everyone lives to extremely old age and there are no children dying. We won't be able to feed them.
Even if we can feed them, the problem perpentuates and becomes a bigger problem.lol

No not really. As people move put of poverty their birth rates dramatically drop.

 

[Value Collector]

No not really. As people move put of poverty their birth rates dramatically drop.

This reminds we of a speech Christopher Hitchens gave where he talks about the empowerment of women being a way out of poverty.

 

[craft]

No not really. As people move put of poverty their birth rates dramatically drop.

Population dropping might stop us from hitting finite resource limitations. I would give it a decent % probability but it still leaves the money system with problems in relation to growth. Look at the problems Japan's money system is having with the very low growth because of demographics.

It doesn't need to be that way GDP per capita via innovation and efficiency can still go up and improve standard of living even if overall GDP is dropping because of the population component its just that at the moment the money system is designed for overall GDP growth.

USA since 1900 has had real growth of 1.3% population + 2% productivity.
Since 2000 that has dropped to .9% population and 1% productivity.

I don't know Japan's numbers but I would guess the decline in Population is offsetting the productivity component. Japan has got quite aggressive with its easing lately in yet another attempt to get its economy going - I suspect the evolution to the money system might occur there first and the so called currency wars are a start of the change as well. They innovated QE which is a band aid for the current system.

Historically money has always been evolving - I won't be surprised if we evolve to some sort of official negative/zero interest rate currency or have government take over the creation of money without debt obligation - question is what happens to outstanding debt obligations because new money without debt obligations will instantly devalue current obligations via inflation.

 

[Value Collector]

.

or have government take over the creation of money without debt obligation - question is what happens to outstanding debt obligations because new money without debt obligations will instantly devalue current obligations via inflation.

any money system where you have banks taking deposits and then lending a fraction out will have a portion of the money supply being based on debt obligations.

Are you suggesting a system should be brought in where banks to do not make loans? Because that's the only way I can see that such a system could be said to not be based on debt obligations,

 

[craft]

any money system where you have banks taking deposits and then lending a fraction out will have a portion of the money supply being based on debt obligations.

Are you suggesting a system should be brought in where banks to do not make loans? Because that's the only way I can see that such a system could be said to not be based on debt obligations,

I’m not trying to prescribe any solution – just watching.

As you can probably guess from my posts so far my view is a paradigm shift in growth rates (very near or at hand) at an aggregate level and a monoculture monetary system based on positive interest that requires aggregate growth to function properly.

Something will give

I’m just trying to think through the possibilities and not be caught unawares.

 

[Value Collector]

This probably the best explanation on the money system I have seen.