education / 学校 [學校] / учи́ть / Bildung

source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCQaNdbRMWw  published on Sep 27, 2014.

This is a rough transcript of the above video that you should store on your offline-harddisk just in case youtube decides to delete it.

Universities and wast majority of the population and academics all have a blind spot – we have a blind spot on the domain of money.

this blind spots consists of 3 levels/layers:

  • 1st Level/Layer) is very old 5000 years old: Distinction between value systems in a patriarchal and a Matrifocal society society.
    • All patriarchal societies in history have always imposed a single currency with positives interest rates – top down – it is actually an extraction device and we still have that.
    • All societies that honor feminine values (Matrifocal societies like Egypt – or central middle ages) use several currencies – an ecosystem of currencies – some of these currencies which are identical to the patriarchal one’s are used for long-distance-trade.
      • more sophisticated: the have “demurage” – a negative interest rate – which is a penalty in keeping and storing money – so it becomes a pure medium of exchange – not at all a store of value – you would be crazy to store a value when there is a penalty in keeping.
  • 2nd Level/Layer) about 100 years old:
    • All fields of human sciences including economics but also sociology, anthropology have all completely polarized between capitalism and communism – as two poles of interpretation of how to organize a modern or industrial society.
    • That polarization has created a tension on everything that is different between them – there are millions of books about what is different between capitalism and communism – there are zero books that study
    • what they (capitalism and communism) have in common – blind spot – that is:
      • the use of a singular currency, on the national level, created by bank-debt, with interest.
      • i would add: they both failed on preventing corruption
    • differences are:
      • in communism / soviet system: the banks were owned by the government
      • in capitalism – the governments only own the banks when the banks fall apart
      • … the rest is the same.
  • 3rd Level/Layer): The Academic BlindSpot
    • try to publish an article in the quarterly Journal of American Economics on questioning the money-system – no way you get it published in this “prestigious” journal – it is locked.
    • i have no problems with economics using mathematics – but what you have is the evidence and the proof – that the mathematics they use is wrong – the mathematical model is wrong since the 19th century – we haven’t gotten out of it – we are still talking about prices being formed by supply and demand and automatically getting to an equilibrium – in fact – the same product in the same city has very different prices depending on the supermarket and it should not be there – according to that model – so reality is proofing us – that this is a very abstract way of looking at reality that does not fit the way economics really is.

Solution:

When you do an open system – then the model that we are proposing which is a complex flow network (like in any natural ecosystem) in which money circulates is the valid one – and we have the proof from thousands of examples of natural ecosystems that this is not stable – unless you put diversity and inter-connectivity within a particular range.

We need to rethink – which mathematics are used and which theoretical framework is being used – which just requires rethinking the entire economic field – which is of course very exciting – for those who want to create something.

There is a huge amount of work to be done – everything needs to be redone.

Economics has never incorporated entropy.

ideological blockage

it has been attempted by Nicolas Georgescu-Roegen (Mathematician, Statistician and Economist) in the 1960s/1970s – but has never been integrated back into economics – has never been integrated into mainstream-economics.

I found it interesting that Samuelson who wrote the preface of Georgescu‘s book basically said: all economists should read this book.

Nicolas Georgescu-Roegen is the scholar of the scholars – and the economist of the economists – really hardcore – and no economist should be ignorant of the implications of entropy in the field – because it really questions everything.

Samuelson himself has never changed his book (to reflect that) – it ran through another 20 editions without changing it (in that direction in any way) – so there is an ideological blockage.

The

biggest problem

i see in the economic framework – besides the definition of an open system – as opposed to a closed system – which is the way it is usually taught – is what do we do what they call “extranalaties”.

In the economic field you have a theoretical framework that is perfectly rational and perfectly mathematical coherent – but it is not related to anything outside of it’s framework.

This is a structural problem – and if you deal with structural problems you need to have structural solutions – if you don’t you just gonna repeat the cycle.

What politicians, economists and (!) society (your father/mother) say:

“If you would work harder – we would not have economic problems” (governments would not be in debt and so on):

FALSE! if there are “STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS IN YOUR ECONOMIC MODEL.”

sisyphos-useless-repetative-labour-but-well-paid_labeled

What i am proposing as a model is: You have the economy as a center – and you have around it the human-social system were economics is a subset of – there are lots of things we do that are not economic.

And the social-system itself is a subset of the biosphere – so the three fall into each other – and therefore there are no analogies in that approach – that is the model – which is called

ecologic economics

i haven’t invented it – there is a full series of people that have been working with it.

ecological_economics-book-coverbut that is not what is taught.

What is taught is an abstract ideology that has nothing to do with reality.

(Rough Transcript of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCQaNdbRMWw (i could not hear every word and google’s subtitle algorithm did not help either)

Screenshot from the above Video: nice gesture Mr Lietaer 😀

bernard-lietaer-our-collective-blindspots-on-the-money-system-patriarchal-money-systems-and-those-that-honor-feminine-values

Just for the Love of it: Who the F**** is “Courtney Love was invented?” ah never mind i just misheard something in the above video.

courtney_love_sxsw_stubbs_spin_party_2010

Video: Description is: “Bernard Lietaer – Outspoken comments on capitalism. See Lietaer‘s interview ”What about Money?” at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33eG7… . The book he mentions: http://www.amazon.com/The-Entropy-Law… by nicholas_georgescu-roegenNicolas Georgescu-Roegen. (Mathematician, Statistician and Economist)the-entropy-law-and-the-economic-process-hardcover-february-5-1971-by-nicolas-georgescu-roegen“Every few generations a great seminal book comes along that challenges economic analysis and through its findings alters men’s thinking and the course of societal change.

This is such a book, yet it is more.

It is a “poetic” philosophy, mathematics, and science of economics.

It is the quintessence of the thought that has been focused on the economic reality.

Henceforce all economists must take these conclusions into account lest their analyses and scholarship be found wanting.

“The entropy of the physical universe increases constantly because there is a continuous and irrevocable qualitative degradation of order into chaos.

The entropic nature of the economic process, which degrades natural resources and pollutes the environment, constitutes the present danger. The earth is entropically winding down naturally, and economic advance is accelerating the process. Man must learn to ration the meager resources he has so profligately squandered if he is to survive in the long run when the entropic degradation of the sun will be the crucial factor, “for suprising as it may seem, the entire stock of natural resources is not worth more than a few days of sunlight!” Georgescu-Rogen has written our generation’s classic in the field of economics.”Library Journal

–This text refers to the Paperback edition.
bioeconomics-and-sustainability-essays-in-honor-of-nicholas-georgescu-roegen-1999
http://0-www.worldcat.org.novacat.nova.edu/identities/lccn-n50016290/

Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, born Nicolae Georgescu (4 February 1906 – 30 October 1994) was a Romanian Americanmathematician, statistician and economist. He is best known today for his path-breaking 1971 magnum opusThe Entropy Law and the Economic Process, where he argued that all natural resources are irreversibly degraded when put to use in economic activity. A progenitor and a paradigm founder in economics, Georgescu-Roegen’s work was seminal in establishing ecological economics as an independent academic subdiscipline in economics.

What is Entropy? Same as Diffusion? Seems similar.

maybe-not-accurate-definition-but-entropy-and-diffusion

“All activities in nature will drive things towards entropy = disorder, so things naturally get disordered.”

“The only way to prevent things from getting disordered – is to apply some energy to them – your body for instance is very ordered and the only way it stays ordered is that you spend a ton of energy holding it together in an ordered fashion – the day that you die – you no longer are expending any energy that hols your body together and your body will fall apart.”

Krasser SCheiß.

source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIr5BdotYls

Abstract: If there is any takeaway from 1971’s The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, it’s this: beneath every intersection of the s
upply and demand curve, there’s a slow, but steady, process of environmental degradation. Try as you will to recycle waste materials,
the book argues—this process cannot be reversed. A formulation of economics backed with this insight was the life vision of
Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, whose work on environmental economics has recently received a new round of academic scrutiny. But
one might ask, why wasn’t Georgescu well received the first time around, during his time? This paper explores that topic.

See BIS.org’s History where it acts as a central bank for central banks: https://www.bis.org/about/history.htm…”

logo_bis

History – overview

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) was established in 1930 in Basel, Switzerland.

It is an international organisation, created pursuant to an international treaty (The Hague Agreements of 1930). Its shareholding members are central banks and monetary authorities.

The mission of the BIS is to serve central banks in their pursuit of monetary and financial stability, to foster international cooperation in those areas and to act as a bank for central banks.

The following pages will tell you more about the history of the BIS:

The following provide more detail about the BIS’s role and evolution:

  • Toniolo, G with the assistance of P Clement (2005): Central bank cooperation at the Bank for International Settlements, 1930-1973, Cambridge-New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Borio, C, G Toniolo and P Clement (eds) (2008): Past and future of central bank cooperation, Cambridge-New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Lefort, D (ed) (2009): “Bank for International Settlements (BIS), Basel, Switzerland”, in International Encyclopaedia of Laws, Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.
  • James, H (2012): Making the European Monetary Union: the role of the Committee of Central Bank Governors and the origins of the European Central Bank, Cambridge-London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

See also this is the biz, the booklet produced for the BIS’s 75th anniversary exhibition.

Ecological Economics Editorial Board

Editor-in-Chief

R.B. Howarth

Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA

Book Review Editor

B. Davidsdottir

University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland

Editors

University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany

K.-H. Erb

Universität Klagenfurt, Vienna, Austria

J.I Hukkinen

University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

R.P. Muradian

Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

L.J. Pearson

University of Canberra, Bruce, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

P.E Perkins

York University, Toronto, Canada

I. Ring

Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Leipzig, Germany

D. Rothman

University of Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA

Managing Editor

A.C. Aitken

Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Associate Editors

P. Antunes

Universidade Nova de Lisboa (Lisbon), Lisbon, Portugal

S. Lele

Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), Bangalore, India

D. Stern

Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

Founding Editor

R. Costanza

Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

Editorial Board
R. Ayres

R. Ayres

Fontainebleau, France

D.W. Bromley

Madison, Wisconsin, USA

K. Chopra

Delhi, India

M.S. Common

Glasgow, UK

R.M. Cowling

Port Elizabeth, South Africa

Z. Dajian

Shanghai, China

V.H. Dale

Oakridge, Tennessee, USA

H.E. Daly

C. Folke

Stockholm, Sweden

J.M. Gowdy

Troy, New York, USA

T..E. Graedel

T..E. Graedel

New Haven, Connecticut, USA

H. Haberl

Vienna, Austria

B. Haddad

Santa Cruz, California, USA

C.A. Hall

B.M. Hannon

R.M. Hassan

Pretoria, South Africa

N. Khanna

Binghampton, New York, USA

P. Kumar

Liverpool, UK

J. Martinez-Alier

Bellaterra Barcelona, Spain

M. Max-Neef

Santiago, Chile

P.H. May

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

K. Mayumi

Tokushima City, Japan

R.P. Muradian

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

E. Neumayer

London, UK

P. Nijkamp

Amsterdam, Netherlands

R.B. Norgaard

Berkeley, California, USA

B.G. Norton

Atlanta, Georgia, USA

J. Paavola

Leeds, England, UK

C. Perrings

Tempe, USA

S. Polasky

St. Paul, Minnesota, USA

W. Proctor

Canberra, Australia

W.E. Rees

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

I. Røpke

Lyngby, Denmark

F. Schläpfer

Zurich, Switzerland

P. Söderbaum

C. Spash

Vienna, Austria

S. Stagl

Vienna, Austria

C.A. Tisdell

Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

R.K. Turner

Norwich, England, UK

K. Urama

Nairobi, Kenya

J.C.J.M. van den Bergh

J.C.J.M. van den Bergh

Cerdanyola des Valles (Barcelona), Spain

A. Vatn

Ås, Norway

P. Victor

North York, Ontario, Canada

Tempe, Arizona, USA

Related Links:

http://sustainability.school/

Related Pictures: john-perkins-ex-economic-hitman-former-employee-of-the-deatheconomy-now-fighting-for-a-lifeeconomy

john-perkins-ex-economic-hitman-former-employee-of-the-deatheconomy-now-fighting-for-a-lifeeconomy-unamred-truth-and-uncondiational-love-will-have-the-final-word

Off-Topic:

https://viaf.org/

->

VIAF: The Virtual International Authority File

The VIAF® (Virtual International Authority File) combines multiple name authority files into a single OCLC-hosted name authority service. The goal of the service is to lower the cost and increase the utility of library authority files by matching and linking widely-used authority files and making that information available on the Web.

The Online Computer Library Center, Inc. (OCLC) is “a nonprofit, membership, computer library service and research organization dedicated to the public purposes of furthering access to the world’s information and reducing information costs”.[2] It was founded in 1967 as the Ohio College Library Center. OCLC and its member libraries cooperatively produce and maintain WorldCat, the largest online public access catalog (OPAC) in the world.

source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fVAifnnlg0

Please also watch the two speakers before him to fully understand what he is talking about: http://altcoopsys.org/2016/10/03/financial-reform-for-a-sustainable-economy-globalutmaning-speakers-bernard-lietaer-michael-kumhof/

They had implemented at least half of the Bretton-Woods money-reform proposals.

The Bretton Woods system after the 2008 crisis

In the wake of the Global financial crisis of 2008, policymakers and others have called for a new international monetary system that some of them also dub Bretton Woods II. On the other side, this crisis has revived the debate about Bretton Woods II.[Notes 5]

On 26 September 2008, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said, “we must rethink the financial system from scratch, as at Bretton Woods.”[44]

On 24–25 September 2009 US President Obama hosted the G20 in Pittsburgh. A realignment of currency exchange rates was proposed. This meeting’s policy outcome could be known as the Pittsburgh Agreement of 2009, where deficit nations may devalue their currencies and surplus nations may revalue theirs upward.

In March 2010, Prime Minister Papandreou of Greece wrote an op-ed in the International Herald Tribune, in which he said, “Democratic governments worldwide must establish a new global financial architecture, as bold in its own way as Bretton Woods, as bold as the creation of the European Community and European Monetary Union. And we need it fast.” In interviews coinciding with his meeting with President Obama, he indicated that Obama would raise the issue of new regulations for the international financial markets at the next G20 meetings in June and November 2010.

Over the course of the crisis, the IMF progressively relaxed its stance on “free-market” principles such as its guidance against using capital controls. In 2011, the IMF’s managing director Dominique Strauss-Kahn stated that boosting employment and equity “must be placed at the heart” of the IMF’s policy agenda.[45] The World Bank indicated a switch towards greater emphases on job creation.[46][47]

However, Deutsche Bank’s Sanjeev Sanyal has argued that the insistence on global balance is fundamentally flawed and that sustained economic growth has always relied on symbiotic imbalances. This means that the world will eventually have to accept a return to new period of imbalance that he calls Bretton Woods III.[42]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system

“Financial reform for a sustainable economy”: Part 3 Bernard Lietae: “Effiency is not everything” or: HOW BAD MUST THE CRISIS GET BEFORE YOU CHANGE YOUR WAY OF BELIEVE.

More Solutions:

first of all: do you know what gives the current fiat-money it’s value? because people WORK for it. If NOBODY would work for DOLLAR or EURO it’s value would be ZERO. Money should be created by everybody – when needed – NO DEBTS! NO MORE!

inbalance-in-our-financial-network-monoculture-is-accident-waiting-to-happen

excess-resilience-excess-efficiency

Bernard Lietaer is definately right – but the problem is the same for the IT-guy telling his boss that:

  1. he should not throw away the old-analog-telephone because if there is a power-outage… no phone, except the old analogue phone on an analogue land-line will work (because it get’s it’s power from the central-telefone-station… not from a 110-220v plug)
  2. he needs to spend 3000€/USD on a box that protects his business network from threats from outside.
  3. he needs to spend another 3000€/USD on improving the backup-system.

… well guess what his boss will say: “WELL… IT WORKED UNTIL NOW… SO WHY SHOULD IT FAIL LATER?” 😀 Ignorance is NOT BLISS – it is stupid – but it saves money in the short term.

 

“Financial reform for a sustainable economy”: Part 2: Michael Kumhof

“Financial reform for a sustainable economy” : Part 4 Pavan Sukhdev or: Why India was not really affected by the 2007/2008 Suprime-Crisis

They had implemented at least half of the Bretton-Woods money-reform proposals.

The Bretton Woods system after the 2008 crisis

In the wake of the Global financial crisis of 2008, policymakers and others have called for a new international monetary system that some of them also dub Bretton Woods II. On the other side, this crisis has revived the debate about Bretton Woods II.[Notes 5]

On 26 September 2008, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said, “we must rethink the financial system from scratch, as at Bretton Woods.”[44]

On 24–25 September 2009 US President Obama hosted the G20 in Pittsburgh. A realignment of currency exchange rates was proposed. This meeting’s policy outcome could be known as the Pittsburgh Agreement of 2009, where deficit nations may devalue their currencies and surplus nations may revalue theirs upward.

In March 2010, Prime Minister Papandreou of Greece wrote an op-ed in the International Herald Tribune, in which he said, “Democratic governments worldwide must establish a new global financial architecture, as bold in its own way as Bretton Woods, as bold as the creation of the European Community and European Monetary Union. And we need it fast.” In interviews coinciding with his meeting with President Obama, he indicated that Obama would raise the issue of new regulations for the international financial markets at the next G20 meetings in June and November 2010.

Over the course of the crisis, the IMF progressively relaxed its stance on “free-market” principles such as its guidance against using capital controls. In 2011, the IMF’s managing director Dominique Strauss-Kahn stated that boosting employment and equity “must be placed at the heart” of the IMF’s policy agenda.[45] The World Bank indicated a switch towards greater emphases on job creation.[46][47]

However, Deutsche Bank’s Sanjeev Sanyal has argued that the insistence on global balance is fundamentally flawed and that sustained economic growth has always relied on symbiotic imbalances. This means that the world will eventually have to accept a return to new period of imbalance that he calls Bretton Woods III.[42]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system