[GJM] corporate sociopath

[robert searle]

Dear Janos,


         TFE is the BASIS of monetary reform which is
best suited for the 21st century, and beyond. It has
powers which can stimulate productivity in the
economy. This already happens with subsidies, and
business grants. Yet, with TFE the process is
increased as never before whenever there is greater
demand. More importantly,and at the same time
Corporations would be "bribed" to bring about
sustainable technologies of a simple, or advanced
nature for themselves, and/or for the public. With the
normal economic system this would be virtually
impossible, and would take too long to occur. The
point is we may not have enough time on this planet,
and it is in everyones interest that we bring about
sustainability on a massive scale ASAP.


I feel Janos you still do not fully understand TFE,
and its huge implications. It goes beyond the "usual
suspects" briefly listed including Binary Economics
which is of secondary imporance. On the other hand,
TFE is of primary importance as far as I am concerned.

Regards,

Robert Searle.



--- Janos <abel at lightnet.co.uk> wrote:

> Dear Everyone,
> 
> Unfortunately, Transfinancial Economics is only part
> of the solution, that 
> is, it is necessary but not sufficient.
> 
> A full societal evolutionary step-change is needed
> where the economic sphere 
> is run on principles advocated by Binary Economics.
> 
> Janos
> 
> PS
> Sorry, Robert, if this comment again seems to you to
> stem from not 
> understanding TFE.
> Sorry, again, but I have to admit that I find the
> notion of new money being 
> distributed by little bureaucrats, running NGOs,
> organisationally 
> distasteful.
> 
> ----- 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 11:05 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
> 
=== message truncated ===



		
___________________________________________________________ 
All New Yahoo! Mail – Tired of Vi at gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html