Economics thread. Have you had enough of wizard of oz monetary scientists?

[MrSmith]

I guess the point is, that if you lived in an equal wealth society, you wouldn't know whether you had little or plenty and you wouldn't care about it as long as your needs and to some degree wants were met.

 

But its already to late for that, if we started an equal wealth society then most of the people would feel poor because we are used to what we have. It wouldn't matter to me that everyone was as poor as me; all that would matter is that I could no longer do the things I used to do.

[manofstrad]

Here is a workable solution to the "banking crisis."

 

http://www.energybackedmoney.com

 

This idea was proposed by Thomas Edison all those years ago and I think it has merit as a solution to the worlds financial problems.

 

Please don't bother to post without reading the link first. I want to hear well thought out criticism and well reasoned arguments.

 

Also I'm taking it for granted that the current fiat economic system has been proven beyond any doubt to be a complete and total failure that impoverishes the many for the benefit of a fraudulent few at the top.

 

It's worth noting that we have just had 100 years of record productivity. New machines and inventions have been created helping to increase the wealth produced over the last century yet people are getting poorer and suffering "austerity." Go figure.

 

I do not accept the argument that our current Economic system is inevitable or beyond improvement. This current system is nothing more than a sham and a control mechanism for the rich and powerful.

 

If you can spot flaws or suggest improvements to the plan given above then please comment. That's what this thread is for.

 

Many people, myself included, are wary of clicking on external links.

 

Could you give us the complete story in your OP please ulti'? Otherwise many folk will not know, or even care what you are talking about. Thanks.

[denlin]

Many people, myself included, are wary of clicking on external links.

 

Could you give us the complete story in your OP please ulti'? Otherwise many folk will not know, or even care what you are talking about. Thanks.

 

Shouldn't you be help sorting awards out your eminence?

[MrSmith]

Yes I do have a potential solution to the specific question you raised.

 

While it will always be possible to invent a virus that can overcome the security of any system, if we distribute the electricity generation as much as possible over a veriety of different systems with different security arrangements at each, we can help mitigate the risk of a catestrophic system wide failure. We can at least buy time while antivirus experts devise a solution.

 

Additionally the system doesn't have to be U.S. centric. If it were a global currency the damage inflicted by a country would have ramifications for its own economy.

 

I think some people are getting too caught up in whether we have a worse standard of living now than we did 100 years ago. It's a very complicated issue and depends whether your talking globally and what your definitions of poverty and such are.

 

I am more interested in discussing the practical aspects of actually implementing the system I have linked to above. Ideally the system would need to, at least for a time, run paralell to the current system.

 

Does anybody here know how smart grids work or have any experience with solar panels and other renewable energy source?

 

Who would build the power plants and whom would these antivirus experts be, its seems to me that in this system they would be more important than many other people, so would want more than the less important members of society.

[truman]

Poverty and inequality are essentially the same thing. You don't feel poor unless you're constantly reminded that there is somebody who has more than you. People have lived with very little with great contentment, but introduce someone who has much more and their contentment levels will naturally drop. You're only made to feel poor if there are others around you who have more than you.

 

Are you saying feeling poor is the same as being poor? I have a reasonably comfortable lifestyle and wage.. but there are lots of people better of then me..does that make me poor?

[denlin]

Many people, myself included, are wary of clicking on external links.

 

Could you give us the complete story in your OP please ulti'? Otherwise many folk will not know, or even care what you are talking about. Thanks.

 

Please clear your PM box eminence

[manofstrad]

Shouldn't you be help sorting awards out your eminence?

 

Hi denlin

 

Awaiting your short list, I can't award without it. I trust you have your house in order (PM me with your seletions please).

[I1L2T3]

Please clear your PM box eminence

 

Inbox full? No doubt he has had the internet delivered to it.

 

He doesn't click on links don't you know.

[ultimatesens]

no it's not.

 

any sort of commodity backed currency needs a fixed amount of the commodity else you are no better off, there is nothing stopping you doubling or trippling the amount of energy you produce.

 

I would argue that using electricity as a commodity would be better than fiat. Right now there is literally nothing to stop them doubling or trippling the money supply whenever they feel like it just like they are doing. That is what is causing all these problems. At least with electricity generation you would have to actually build the power plants to back up your money. I don't think that is very different from building gold mines. At least electricity can be used for something.

 

if the population were to adopt significant energy saving measures then you could decommission some of your energy generating capability which would mean deflating your economy, perhaps fatally.

 

You "could" decommission energy generators, you don't "have" to. Certainly not if it would cause the deflating effects you suggest. Keep them running and all the efficiency measures you have implemented become extra economic output. A truly green economic system based on efficiency.

 

it was the attempts to return to the gold standard in the 1920's which forced the uk into recession and then depression.

 

If you say so. The biggest flaw in your argument is that we don't live in the 1920's. The second biggest flaw is that I am not advocating a return to that commodity.

 

rightly or wrongly we are stuck with fiat currencies forever....

 

Said like a true banker.

 

the sort of deflation required to return to any sort of commodity backed currency would make the consequences relating to the possible collapse of the euro look like a party.

 

Personally I think the collapse of the Euro is just one symptom of a much larger economic meltdown on the horizon. Plus you haven't said why returning to a commodity backed currency would lead to deflation, or even why that would be a bad thing. In the link it explains that price deflation is a natural result of increasing economic output and is actually a good thing.

 

if you could find a commodity to avoid that, then all you are doing is locking in the current level of money supply.

 

Precisely. So greedy bankers can't print loads of it on a whim and funnel it in to their own personal swiss bank accounts while leaving the rest of us to carry the can.

 

Nice attempt to convince people to stick with the status quo once again Andyofborg but you'll have to do better than that when your posting in my threads.

[Cavegirl]

But its already to late for that, if we started an equal wealth society then most of the people would feel poor because we are used to what we have. It wouldn't matter to me that everyone was as poor as me; all that would matter is that I could no longer do the things I used to do.

 

I've been trying to discuss it more in terms of logic than in real terms and I think most people would agree that on a point of logic it would be better for everybody if we lived in an equal wealth society - wealth equality reduces crime, reduces violence, stops the need for wars etc etc.

 

In terms of implementing it in the real world well you're assuming you would have to take a drop in lifestyle. My own research suggests that the top earners in society have so much accumulated wealth that actually if it were redistributed fairly then the vast majority of people would be significantly better off. You can check this out for yourself online if you're interested enough.

 

The problem would be in redistributing things that themselves have a relative wealth value- for example land. How could you redistribute land to ensure that everybody gets an equal share? You could do it by size, but coastal landscapes are intrinsically higher value (in aesthetic and economic terms) than heath landscapes so to try to create an equal overall wealth society in real terms has significant problems associated with it.

 

The simplest way to do it would be to ensure that money is cycled throughout the whole economy effectively and fairly. Essentially an end to selfish hoarding for hoardings sake. It would rely on people changing their attitudes to private ownership more than it would on providing actual fiscal rules.

 

You might also be interested to discover that we did in fact start out with an equal society- until the Late Bronze Age societies are considered to have been egalitarian- they simply had nothing worth hoarding because everything they needed was in plentiful supply until metals came into use.