[GJM] Some Old, and New Evolving Ideas in TFE, and Sustainability.

[robert searle]

Dear All,

      The following may appear at the end of the
present TFE internet paper.


R.Searle

        An Important Notice To Readers.


It must be stressed that the above TFE article/paper
is work in progress on the internet but the basic
concepts will remain unaltered. There are certain
though certain points which need to be said:

1) In Super-Flexibility Pricing it should be stated
that not only can prices levels be fined but also
capped to prevent total devaluation of currency.

2) Another paper/article on TFE (with direct
references) was accepted by a peer reviewed journal of
high standing. Copyright clearance forms were signed.
However, due to a dispute I withdrew it from
publication. It is now being sent elsewhere.

3) Most people will realize that interest free
monetary reform is largely pie in the sky. I, the
author, and originator of TFE, am coming to the
conclusion that mainly working with banks, and
corporations (rather than largely against them) is
really the way forward. As already explained profits
as interest can be created by special independent
public authorities.

As for corporations, a more positive approach would be
necessary, and hinted at on the on-line paper of
TFE....

It would be too expensive at the present time for them
to turn to eco-friendly technologies. However, with
special business NGOs they could help fund the
corporations to do so via massive non-repayable
commercial grants. Any compensation due to
share-holders could be paid for too. 

All this would have profound implications for the
fossil based fuel industries which could be taken over
via irresistable financial offers, or else turn their
attentions towards sustainable technologies. If they
did the latter such capital investments would also
involve huge commercial grants to make it extremely
attractive financially, and hence, wean them off
fossil fuel production.

At the time of writing there is a great deal of
interest in global warming. Green Taxes are one way
forward but a far better, and more effective approach
is to shut down the fossil fuel based industries, and
at the same time go into overdrive into the mass
creation of sustainable technologies with the aid of
grants, and interest free loans (in certain instances,
profits could also be subsidized). With TFE the pace
of change could be greatly speeded up. The new
unearned money could act as powerful "bribes" for
corporations to take up in their future sustainable
projects.

Ofcourse, there would also be a huge investment in the
research, and development of new emerging sustainable
technologies (eg. geo-thermal energy). This as
mentioned before would be undertaken by special
business NGOs, and even indepedently of corporations,
and governments if desired.

4) With the banks, and corporations largely on our
side the introduction of TFE becomes a more likely
reality. However, the Treasury Bank for democratic
governments, and the Grant Generating Banks should be
independent public authorities. This should be seen as
being non-negotiable.

5) In TFE banks, and corporations would make far
greater profits than before. Yet, they will also come
to learn that the more money they have the less
business resources there are available. New ones
though could be created via research, and development
projects but ofcourse these too would be finite in
number. 

As a result banks, and corporations may attempt to buy
up existing businesses. To some extent, this already
happens. With TFE this would probably happen more
often. If they start to acquire "too many" short-term,
and long-term investments these could be bought up at
a higher (irresistable) price by special business
NGOs. In other words, the power of banks, and
corporations would be contained in TFE by ethical
control buy-ups (ECBs). Slowly, but surely it will
fully dawn on them that the power of money can be
limited if the resources are not there, or taken under
their noses by "irresistable" offers.

In the normal scheme of things all this would probably
mean the poor getting poorer especially in the Third
World. This is incorrect as NGOs, and progressive
governments would be able to have the necessary funds
to deal with all this. This would be created for them
by independent public authorities. The only limits are
natural ones...efficient creative planning, and
ofcourse, relevant resources. 

Indeed, the Third World itself would be encouraged as
never before to become rich, and powerful. This would
be in the interest of the corporations because they
would not only have a market in the already wealthy
countries but also in the former poor ones! This is a
big subject which we shall not go into here.


6) It must be stressed here that TFE would be
extremely popular for banks, corporations, and even
global justice. The public would love it, and would be
a vote winner. Infact, it transcends politics.

7) Some will inevitably argue that the Positive
Engagement,Dialogue, and Negotiations with Banks, and
Corporations is to a certain degree unethical. The
problem is that we have little choice if we are
seriously  concerned with the reform, and indeed, the
literal survival of the human race at record speed. 

Remember NGOs concerned with fairer wealth
distribution, and other social, economic, and
political problems would become more influential as
never before. This is because of their greater
financial empowerment.Yet, this is clearly neither the
time, or season for the wholesale acceptance of such
higher evolutionary ideas. What is important is NOW,
and TFE offers a remarkable way forward which again
would be very popular with most people at their
present level of self-development.

Again, it must be repeated TFE at the time of writing
is still in the process of research, and development.


R.Searle    November 2006.






		
___________________________________________________________ 
Inbox full of spam? Get leading spam protection and 1GB storage with All New Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html