[GJM] INSTANT ELECTRONIC INFLATION TAXATION AND PRICE SUBSIDY INCENTIVES IN TRANSFINANCIAL ECONOMICS (FEB 2008)

[robert searle]

Yes, you make some interesting, and orignal comments
worthy of consideration unlike Mr. Johnson who is
trapped in "old paradigm" economic thinking, and keeps
on repeating himself ad nauseaum with the usual credo
(along with pot shots at me).

As for the spikes in prices in TFE they would be no
problem because of the generous price range levels
(until the "temporary," and "flexible" electronic
Price  Ceiling is reached)which allows for supply, and
demand to self-adjust as naturally as possible vital
for a market economy

Moreover, you seem to indicate that an eduction, or
rather a new MASS EDUCATION as to the nature of
inflation would be important. This is good thinking,
and is certainly  on the radar as far as my TFE
project is concerned. 




Robert Searle


--- Steve Consilvio <steve at behappyandfree.com> wrote:

> Robert, isn't the problem you are trying to fix the
> occurrence of  
> spikes in prices?  While we think of inflation as a
> generic singular  
> event, in reality it is occurring separately and
> individually on each  
> good.  As such, wouldn't the easier solution be to
> remove the spikes  
> by setting a uniform standard, instead?
> 
> For example, let's assume everything that is sold
> has a fixed mark-up  
> of 1%.  As the product moves from hand to hand from
> raw material to  
> finished good on the retailer shelf, if everybody
> uses the same mark- 
> up, then the possibility of spikes occurring is
> moot.  The selling  
> price is always pre-determined by the purchase
> price.  The good will  
> cost the same proportionately and relatively to
> every other good  
> FOREVER.  As advancements are made in production
> capacity, etc., the  
> price should drop.  If businesses are inefficient,
> they would still  
> be selling based on cost, rather than the mythical
> "marketplace forces."
> 
> The problem we have now, besides the occurrence of
> price spikes, is  
> also that any gains from machinery are lost as well
> to the nature of  
> compounding profit margins, which are mirrored by
> compounding  
> losses.  The same product is sold at different
> prices to different  
> customers by the same company, for example, giving
> some players a  
> distinct advantage.  This is done because of the
> concept of  
> competition, but we do not need a "competitive"
> marketplace, we  
> simply need one that works.
> 
> I don't know if I am being as clear as I would like.
>  I think you  
> would agree that PURCHASING POWER is a fallacy when
> inflation is  
> altering the cost of the goods constantly.  Also, it
> is imperative  
> that not only the price of goods be under a standard
> mark-up, but  
> also the price of land.  Land inflation will
> inevitably lead to  
> product inflation.
> 
> To give a real world example, I lowered my prices on
> t-shirts today.   
> http://www.squeegeegraphics.com/home/tshirts.html I
> could just have  
> easily raided them.  Nobody would know the
> difference.  But had  
> Bernanke said yesterday, "Hey everybody, cut your
> profit margins,"  
> then he would have done some good.  Instead, he is
> telling people to  
> be afraid of inflation before it even occurs.  He is
> REACTING AND  
> PREDICTING when what he should be doing is
> INSTRUCTING.  As the owner  
> of a business, it is my job to LEAD, which means
> that I must have 1)  
> principles, 2) standards and 3) instructions for
> others.  Thus, there  
> are three ways (at least) to be in error.  So I
> would suggest the  
> following:
> 
> 1. Principle: Inflation is caused by individuals
> "marking-up" the  
> price of goods (buy low, sell high)
> 2. Standard: The lower the mark-up number, the
> better for everyone.   
> Zero is the best number, but 1% would be manageable.
>  Currently, the  
> average number is 50%.  I set my shirts at 30%,
> which I could only do  
> because I have low overhead.  (It took me 20 years
> to figure that  
> out, unfortunately.)
> 3. Instructions: There's the rub, eh?  In a free
> market, everybody  
> does what they want, and Pangloss says that it is
> "the best of all  
> possible worlds," no matter what horrors are
> occurring.  However, if  
> we had good principles and standards, then
> instructions wouldn't be  
> very hard to accept.  As it stands today, what most
> people teach as  
> "financial literacy" is the abandonment of #1 & #2,
> and encourages  
> greater profits and land and value manipulations.
> 
> It really isn't so hard to say "Hey everybody,
> decrease your profit  
> margins!" but getting people to understand why it is
> important is  
> difficult, since we have all been indoctrinated to
> believe the  
> opposite, and our fear of inflation leads us to
> create more of what  
> we fear.  Nevertheless, "Less is More."
> 
> It is also worth noting that the more hands that
> touch a product,  
> then the more the product will cost.  This is why
> vertical companies  
> seem to have a competitive advantage, but eventually
> the math catches  
> up with them, too, since they also have a larger
> overhead to  
> maintain.  Any bump in their sales causes a domino
> effect, and the  
> fear embedded in large organizations causes them to
> both hoard wealth  
> and to try to maximize profits. Both strategies come
> back to haunt  
> them, as we can see with the wild swings in the auto
> industry.
> 
> Nobody can outrun their own inflation, which is why
> we must  
> understand the obvious and simple origin of
> inflation, (I create it,  
> since I set the prices,) and popularize a standard
> that lower mark- 
> ups lead to a healthier economy.  Everyone needs to
> be re-educated to  
> recognize principles, standards and instructions. 
> We are now  
> instructing children to invest and manipulate money
> (see this years  
> SuperBowl commercial,) so the calamitous effects are
> inevitable.   
> Once we make children into pigeons in this insane
> ponzi scheme, I  
> assume we have met the end of the road, for America
> at least.  There  
> are plenty more other countries that seem to want to
> copy our  
> failures.  Looks like North Korea will be next.
> 
> peace,
> steve
> 
> 
> On WednesdayFeb 27, 2008, at 2:00 PM, discussion- 
> request at globaljusticemovement.net wrote:
> 
> >   What I have been presenting are just rough draft
> > ideas for the successful control of inflation
> levels.
> > In this case we will touch on Inflation
> "Taxation".
> > Note the word Taxation in brackets. What we are
> > dealing with here is not an instant elecdtronic
> > deduction of the AMOUNT of money in real terms but
> > rather its PURCHASING POWER.
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at globaljusticemovement.net
>
http://globaljusticemovement.net/mailman/listinfo/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net
> 




      __________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail.
A Smarter Inbox. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html