[GJM] corporate sociopath
Martin Hattersley
hattersleyjm at interbaun.com
Mon Nov 20 11:41:53 MST 2006
Robert - you say:
" We have little time to waste on high moral
arguments about the present financial system. It can
still create loans but these would be interest free"
The problem is that the situation causing the debt problem in our society
has very little to do with the charging of interest: it has everything to do
with the manufacture of money through debt by the banking system.
It is as if the printer of banknotes charged the face value of those notes
to the public, instead of the cost of printing, and then graciously allowed
us to pay that full face value by instalments over the years, so that we
temporarily had some money in our pockets to keep the economy moving, but in
the end would be as penniless as before unless we took another loan.
I don't see that TFE, if it allows the banks to continue banking in this
manner even without charging interest, solves the situation.
Martin Hattersley
5929 - 189 St.,
EDMONTON AB CANADA T6M 2J1
jmartinh at shaw.ca
e-mail: hattersleyjm at interbaun.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "robert searle" <dharao4 at yahoo.co.uk>
To: "Discussion Forum for Global Justice"
<discussion at globaljusticemovement.net>
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 4:05 AM
Subject: Re: [GJM] corporate sociopath
> Dear All,
>
> At last we are beginning to see people
> talking sense on this Forum. There is only one real
> solution to many of our problems. It is called
> Transfinancial Economics. If people focused their
> minds on this they would be getting
> somewhere....otherwise the "usual suspects" of land
> tax reform, LETS, social credit,new economics, et al
> are not really upto the job of creating massive
> positive changes in society, the economy, and politics
> necessary for your survival.
>
> What is now more credible about TFE, and makes it a
> very promising proposal indeed is that we can work
> with the banks, and corporations rather than against
> them. We have little time to waste on high moral
> arguments about the present financial system. It can
> still create loans but these would be interest free
> authority.
>
>
> Robert Searle
>
>
>
> --- marguerite hampton <ecopilgrim at aabol.com> wrote:
>
>> "corporate sociopath"
>> Posted by: "lurban kohler" lurbankohler at yahoo.com
>> Sat Nov 18, 2006 4:48 pm (PST)
>> Urban wrote in part:
>>
>> In case you read this Eco, your response to the
>> building of the future, that it would cost too much,
>> makes me feel somehow we need to be reminded money
>> has
>> no actual value, therefore NO amount is excessive if
>> spent to create a sustainable planet. Money is a
>> human
>> artifact. It's power has been hijacked by the dark
>> side. Were the forces of "light" to regain control
>> of
>> this power, surely we should be as willing to employ
>> its magic to sustain the earth as are the forces of
>> darkness which control it now willing to employ it
>> to destroy!
>>
>> eco: I seem to be back in the good graces of Yahoo
>> again and am receiving posts and am as well able to
>> post to Yahoo lists.
>>
>> Urban, what I was attempting to say here is that in
>> the present circumstances -- the way the GMS is
>> set up, money does have value and is bought and
>> sold like any other commodity. This is why we pay
>> points to acquire a loan. Which is a very large
>> part of the problem. Also, in the manner in which
>> production is structured today, the "external costs'
>> are largely ignored. What I mean by external costs
>> are negative effects on the environment and
>> consequently
>> on the human family. These effects went largely
>> unoticed
>> for thousands of years, but have finally caught up
>> to us
>> where they can no longer be ignored. Global climate
>> change has a very large profile. So, remediation
>> costs
>> which should have been included in the initial
>> pricing of
>> the product were not included. Consequently, we are
>> faced with a barrage of remediation costs
>> accumulated
>> over thousands of years and which the Stern Report
>> fortells will be in the trillions of dollars as we
>> attempt to
>> deal with global climate change.
>>
>> One of the things we have to come to grips
>> with is that
>> whatever activity the human family does,
>> there is a
>> negative impact on the environment whether
>> that activity
>> be raising food or building structures.
>> And advanced
>> technology comes with a higher price tag
>> than does
>> simpler forms of technology such as
>> building a grass hut
>> using human labor vs building the type of
>> structure Reinhold
>> proposes using advanced technology. So,
>> whatever the
>> structure Reinhold proposes does when it
>> is completed,
>> there are still negative external costs
>> attached that will
>> quite probably be ignored as always. Most
>> of these costs
>> will be associated with materials
>> acquisition, but dependent
>> upon what type of energy is utilized some
>> external costs will
>> be energy-related. Which is one reason
>> we need Zero Point
>> Energy as it is known to be relatively
>> free of external costs
>> compared to wind or solar power.
>>
>> I just viewed 25 windmills put into
>> action by the Kumeyaay
>> Tribe of Campo Indians here. The cost of
>> constuction for
>> this operation was $75 million dollars
>> excluding the negative
>> impact on the environment for parts
>> production, etc.
>>
>> I did not have the opportunity to find
>> out what the anticipated
>> ROI on this project is, but if external
>> costs are included --
>> meaning the costs of production of parts
>> on the environment
>> then this project would probably not
>> make sense.
>>
>> One of the ways corporations evade
>> external costs is to
>> do projects in the developing world
>> where the laws are looser
>> and external costs ignored. Which is
>> another reason why many
>> U.S. jobs are going offshore.
>>
>> In many cases, the external ignored
>> costs could offset any gains
>> that seem to have been made when looked
>> at from an "up front"
>> position.
>>
>> The conclusions I have arrived at over
>> time, and which I am sure
>> the GMS has also considered, is that
>> environmentally-sensitive
>> projects simply, at this time anyway,
>> do not have the
>> capability
>> of generating the kind of income/profit
>> necessary to cover the
>> costs of labor and other associated
>> costs + the ROI necessary
>> to attract investors and pay dividends.
>>
>>
>> We need to be able to have a system
>> based on recapture, recycle
>> and 100% reuse just as nature does.
>> However, we also have to
>> recognize that if this were in effect,
>> the need for human labor
>> would
>> further drop to around 3% of the
>> available workforce. Yet
>> today,
>> we are already staggering under the
>> need for only 30% of the
>> world's available human labor force.
>> So it is obvious that we
>> cannot
>> continue with the same kind of
>> economy/monetary system that has
>> worked in the past. This is a whole
>> new ballgame.
>>
>> Let me try and make this a little more
>> clear re: external costs
>>
>> : If the cost of a pound of beef
>> included external costs using
>> today;s
>> methods of production, the price would
>> likely be up around
>> $90 a pound -- for oil it might be as
>> high as $300 a gallon.
>> Yet our
>> government subsidizes both oil and
>> beef, excluding
>> externalities,
>> so as to keep prices low and encourage
>> continued excessive
>> consumption of these and other
>> products so the elite and other
>>
>> investors such as retired persons may continue to
>> reap high ROI's.
>>
>> The formerly large and mainly white middle and lower
>> upper class was largely
>> built
>> on the travel, oil, beef, and insurance industries
>> through ignoring external
>> costs. And, this is why the U.S. became the most
>> prosperous country in
>> the history of the world while doing more
>> environmental destruction than
>> at any time in pre-recorded history since World War
>> II. What we sow, we
>> will inevitably reap.
>>
>> For more on this may I suggest Jim Bell's book:
>> "Achieving Eco-nomic
>> Security On Spaceship Earth" available as a
>> complimentary download
>> at Jim's website: www.jimbell.com
>>
>> marguerite aka eco
>>
>>
>>
>> . . .
>>
>>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> Discussion mailing list
>> Discussion at globaljusticemovement.net
>>
> http://globaljusticemovement.net/mailman/listinfo/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net
>>
>
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at globaljusticemovement.net
> http://globaljusticemovement.net/mailman/listinfo/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.9/540 - Release Date: 20/11/2006
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.9/540 - Release Date: 20/11/2006
More information about the Discussion
mailing list