East Meets West Logic...

[SB_UK]

Is there any truth in posts #393 and #394 in lw's thread?

http://www.toequest.com/forum/logic-...html#post98800
http://www.toequest.com/forum/logic-...html#post98801

In summary -

National profiles of wages earned (translate into a global currency used solely for exchange) used to define how much a product costs.

If an average person in India earns 1/2 Bancor -
and an average person in Canada earns 1 Bancor
- then the exchange is set to in effect permit people in India to purchase the item in India for 1/2 as much.

The more powerful currency (Canadian in this example) would penalise itself (through becoming weaker against the Bancor) if people in Canada get ahead of themselve and earn more and more money
- in isolation.

Using greed to combat greed - local increases in wealth resulting in its own dampening effect by increasing (in effect) the cost of foreign trade.

In simpler summary -

A system which prevents local strength from destabilizing global affairs
- which penalises local strength by reducing (instead of increasing (as currently happens))
- the strength of that currency in global transactions.

How would this system work ?
- simply plot a complete distribution of the salary earned in each country (all people represented on the distribution)
- eliminate outliers in each country
(possible if we have a single global banking system)
and then
- fix an exchange rate based on the overlap between these distributions.

If the average salary in India is 50 local units and the average salary in Canada is 2 local units -
(both in pure statistical distributions - outliers not permitted)
- then the exchange rate is set as 2 local units Canadian to 50 local units Indian -

- affording the same distribution of purchasing power to each country.

If either India or Canada do not want to trade (either import or export)
- then they needn't.

However if trade occurs
- it'll be fair.

[SB_UK]

aaarghhh!

In need of help :
http://www.toequest.com/forum/logic-...html#post98803

All attempts to level the playing field lead to some variation on a one~wage system.

Going slightly mad -
where's my error?

Trying to generate a fair distribution
- end up with the fairest distribution arising when all people have the same purchasing power.

My head hurts.

~*~

If we examine the bureaucracy heavy systems which are introduced (in taxation or benefit law)
- these systems generally tend to be about re-distribution of wealth -
increased taxation in the rich -
lower rates for the poor.

However fear in the middle ground results in increased savings and incapacity to buy - higher taxation - reduced quality of life for the vast majority
(the vast silent majority of people who exist in the middle).

Neither a borrower nor a lender be.

- great advice.

One can't actually use money (the silent measured majority which resides in the middle ground) through fear of exposure to (for instance) legal or medical charges in the case of an emergency.

~*~

An attempt to move the model away from idealised and into real issues.

[SB_UK]

problem

Any system must support sustainable growth.
Any system should work with the prime directive of helping to ensure that all people are afforded as much scaleable sustainable fun as possible.One~wage might result in stagnation -
however (and a really big however) ... ... ...

- people want to have fun and not money (the dissociation of fun and money which we're currently (now) making possible)
One~wage might result in stagnation -
however (and a really big however)
won't
(I think)
- when we understand ourselves.

An economic system which'll work as long as there's an understanding (by each of us) of our intra-Universal context* (of why we exist) (where that we exist need be our only axiom in this train of thought).

Apologies Lloyd - I'm trying but can't reject some variation on a one~wage system; the closest I can get to rejection is a measured transition (which'll take a little time) to global one~wage introduction.

Not trying to be difficult -
a little annoyed at myself (if anything) that I can't work out a solution to this problem.

~*~

... ... an understanding (by each of us) of our intra-Universal context*

How?

Stare at a whole buncha' pictures from the Hubble and observe (with commentary when we're ready) the repetitive motifs which occur up there relative to down here.

Aside
Thinking so hard currently to work up a solution to this problem that my head is spinning, feeling sick, need to go the toilet, shaking and feeling both weak and uncontrollably hungry
- what a combination!

Aside II
The only question which has caused me this much of a meltdown (and which needs to be avoided) is why anything?

Why anything? and WTF money? are the two hardest problems -
- one of which (the former) - we'll never solve
- the other one of which we'll solve when we (don't laugh)
actually evolve
to better.

~*~

I don't think that a fair economic system can be found whilst we're in this current state of mind
- need a higher state of mind where scaleable fun can be envisionsed without the need for any form of purchasing power.

[SteveA]

I think the single wage is just whatever someone wants it to be with participation being optional.

The rule of thumb is simply that everyone's happy with the arrangement and they stick around because it's the best thing going any details or complexity beyond that can be added between people as they see fit and that keeps thing simple.

(Of course the quality of the results depend upon the insight of the people to see how it works)

But a quick example - traffic lights. There's really no reason someone should wait around at a red light if any cross traffic would be visible and there's no other cars around.

People stop and wait simply because of violating the law, not because of a real benefit.

If people were simply responsible in their actions, you don't need any laws - the lights are just there to help give everyone coordination, but following them precisely is limiting and unnecessary when a larger view of the picture is seen.

I recognize it's not realistic, but the ideal between ideal people with a superhuman perspective appears to just be that everyone does what they think is best at any moment. Of course we don't have this perspective in life from moment to moment and actions are short sighted, not often well informed or habitual and not dynamically optimized and growing etc.

So how do people get to that better state? Well they have to learn how to become what they want the rest of it to be and if that requires learning that is forgotten every generation then it could just be evolution that maintains the inertia instead of social or cultural changes (but I don't think evolution is necessarily a passive thing, so that's an interesting area to look at).

But it does appear, at least to me, that the ideal is not really something that can be enforced externally - it really requires people to change themselves and grow and get a broader view of things and take a longer term perspective (I'd love to say personal specifics, give detailed advice and opinions etc., but simultaineously it's better if people learn for themselves as well and understand why things are as they are and feel in their gut what those are etc. There's no way to force anyone to "see the light" and so it's really best to just find it for yourself and let other people find it in their own way ... yes, I'm largely talking to myself again . I could list tons of details that I think would make great improvements, but those are all just temporary unless people really understand the whys behind them and sometimes that means making mistakes. Dang I've got to figure that one out someday!!! It just seems there should be some way to help more, but in the end I think people can only change themselves and that's how it really should be unless someone wanted someone else to change them, which might even be impossible even if was desired and clones are boring and an informational dead end too ... personally I prefer learning (requires some unknown) and mistakes (can't be selective) are just some of the costs, though learning itself doesn't alter anything except a context and so it's not actually required ... so maybe the learning can stop and things become simply rigid beliefs and experience (I guess in some ways that's like acting and "spending" and entropy of knowledge, so how to optimize the efficiency of that?) ... an interesting possibility).

And I ramble as always (and I'm trying to cut back on the on-line time) so until later ...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi Lorrina, and thanks for the credits, but it was Leskey who turned me on to her, just to give credit where credit is due__I do like her...rrr

Thank you for introducing me to another new artist, and it seems she is relatively new on the scene also, but I expect she will become popular.

This video comes with fashion tips! She manages to make lace-up sneakers look good, lol...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOUS0...eature=related

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Ahhh... Science becomes so much clearer when viewed in its original language areas and meanings. The good ol' Greeks were quite a smart group of investigators. C.S.Peirce also stated something like this years ago, 'Original uses and meanings of words and scientific ideas should be respected, not to confuse later generations.' That sure tells me what's happened to modern society__The duplicities plus, of mondern languages and ideas...rrr

Thanks Leskey...

Thanks, Lloyd. In my haste to follow your thread, I omitted to follow up you original post .

I'm a self confessed science-dummy...but, can't help thinking that this is somehow pertinent to the other side of active galactic nuclei...yeah, yeah, I Wiki'd it (but I'm really very pushed for time)...

...variants of TiN (titanium nitride)...colors ranging from light gray to nearly black, to a dark iridescent bluish-purple...


Iridescence is generally known as the property of certain surfaces which appear to change colour as the angle of view changes. Iridescence may be seen commonly in soap bubbles and butterfly wings.

Iridescence (also known as goniochromism) is an optical phenomenon of surfaces in which hue changes in correspondence with the angle from which a surface is viewed.

Iridescence is caused by multiple reflections from multi-layered, semi-transparent surfaces in which phase shift and interference of the reflections modulates the incident light (by amplifying or attenuating some frequencies more than others). This process is the functional analog of selective wavelength attenuation as seen with the Fabry-Pérot interferometer.

The word iridescence is derived in part from the Greek word iris (pl. irides), meaning "rainbow", which in turn derives from the goddess Iris of Greek mythology, who is the personification of the rainbow and acted as a messenger of the gods. Goniochromism is derived from the Greek words gonia, which means angle, and chroma, which means color.
Conventional photography only records the specific effect of iridescence, just as it only captures the effect of three dimensions; however, iridescence can be reproduced by holography (which includes phase information).

You might think I'm mad...but, if that's the case, I'll follow it up in due course, anyhow...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

And SB, yes to both your posts at Lw's thread. To make your theorizing of understanding easier, just realize much of the present price differentials can be solved with pure accounting changes, not all, but a great deal, and also realize this is a dynamic system of change over a ten year period, of say 10% per year real change, to prevent excess damage to the system. Also realize this system is not mine entirely, though I did discover it before even reading Keynes and others, the others are to have most of the credit, as they preceded me. You are doing a great job figuring out the complexities__Simply_Thanks...rrr

Is there any truth in posts #393 and #394 in lw's thread?

http://www.toequest.com/forum/logic-...html#post98800
http://www.toequest.com/forum/logic-...html#post98801

In summary -

National profiles of wages earned (translate into a global currency used solely for exchange) used to define how much a product costs.

If an average person in India earns 1/2 Bancor -
and an average person in Canada earns 1 Bancor
- then the exchange is set to in effect permit people in India to purchase the item in India for 1/2 as much.

The more powerful currency (Canadian in this example) would penalise itself (through becoming weaker against the Bancor) if people in Canada get ahead of themselve and earn more and more money
- in isolation.

Using greed to combat greed - local increases in wealth resulting in its own dampening effect by increasing (in effect) the cost of foreign trade.

In simpler summary -

A system which prevents local strength from destabilizing global affairs
- which penalises local strength by reducing (instead of increasing (as currently happens))
- the strength of that currency in global transactions.

How would this system work ?
- simply plot a complete distribution of the salary earned in each country (all people represented on the distribution)
- eliminate outliers in each country
(possible if we have a single global banking system)
and then
- fix an exchange rate based on the overlap between these distributions.

If the average salary in India is 50 local units and the average salary in Canada is 2 local units -
(both in pure statistical distributions - outliers not permitted)
- then the exchange rate is set as 2 local units Canadian to 50 local units Indian -

- affording the same distribution of purchasing power to each country.

If either India or Canada do not want to trade (either import or export)
- then they needn't.

However if trade occurs
- it'll be fair.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

"All attempts to level the playing field lead to some variation on a one~wage system." Because, that is the final result of all total system theorizing, but, and this is a big but, we must have a transition system, from here to there. And, the transition and final system must respect Incentives...!!!rrr

Without incentives respected in any and all systems theorizably possible, we have the malaise and boredom__We don't want that__Too many drunks_Russian example...rrr

aaarghhh!

In need of help : Rescue squad on the way...
http://www.toequest.com/forum/logic-...html#post98803

All attempts to level the playing field lead to some variation on a one~wage system.

Going slightly mad -
where's my error?[Dynamics__The eversion dynamics of foreign exchange mechanics_It's just much more complex than one realizes, as most derivatives contracts, as well as many others, are the hidden variables, just as to the eversion principles of the uncertainty principle__Same dish, different soup...]

Trying to generate a fair distribution
- end up with the fairest distribution arising when all people have the same purchasing power.[Jumping too far ahead of oneself hurts head... Slower, it's a steep hill, but a very rewarding climb...]

My head hurts.[You oughta' be me__I been carrying this idea around, like a big lead weight, for over 27 years__It hurts, at times, but me thinks the pain is well worth it...]

~*~

If we examine the bureaucracy heavy systems which are introduced (in taxation or benefit law)
- these systems generally tend to be about re-distribution of wealth -
increased taxation in the rich -
lower rates for the poor.[Bancor' as originally proposed by Keynes, works semi-philanthropically, when all labor wages and standards of currencies are in place, as per new system's advocacy_E=1/5X is a 20% value standard for new money creation_thus preventing the ol' demon of inflation and hyper-inflations, or their counterparts_deflation and hyper-deflations...]

However fear in the middle ground results in increased savings and incapacity to buy - higher taxation - reduced quality of life for the vast majority
(the vast silent majority of people who exist in the middle).
- great advice.

One can't actually use money (the silent measured majority which resides in the middle ground) through fear of exposure to (for instance) legal or medical charges in the case of an emergency.

~*~

An attempt to move the model away from idealised and into real issues.

Seeing the model completely may be quite a chore__But with the rescue squad working over-time__Highly possible...rrr

[Lloyd Gillespie]

'I don't think that a fair economic system can be found whilst we're in this current state of mind - need a higher state of mind where scaleable fun can be envisionsed without the need for any form of purchasing power.' This one is easy__Total computerization to a tallyboard system(I do not advocate this though, but a system that accomplishes similar actions, without pain), as used on farms, or as Egypt used with its great public works Empires for centuries...rrr

One has to see the global historys' mechanics of public works Empires, such as Egypt, Greece and Rome as related to the public works Empires of Spain, France, Germany, England and America, as per their mammoth public works expenditures of WWI and WWII, etc. We spent massive amounts of newly created money, and didn't go broke__How...??? Key__Credit, wage and price controls...!!!(I do not advocate this though, but a system which the dynamics of accomplishes the similar, without pain) Governments took the big roll of survival over Greed...!!! The key is what governments Can Do, not what they can not do__Gov. sponsored financial engineering...!!!

problem

Any system must support sustainable growth.[Good sustainable growth_Yes...]
Any system should work with the prime directive of helping to ensure that all people are afforded as much scaleable sustainable fun as possible.One~wage might result in stagnation -
however (and a really big however) ... ... ...

- people want to have fun and not money (the dissociation of fun and money which we're currently (now) making possible)
One~wage might result in stagnation -
however (and a really big however)
won't
(I think)
- when we understand ourselves.[Isn't understanding ourselves, understanding all this complexity in one simple vision?__Including money and greed...?]

An economic system which'll work as long as there's an understanding (by each of us) of our intra-Universal context* (of why we exist) (where that we exist need be our only axiom in this train of thought).[Where, and our best survival state__possible...]

Apologies Lloyd - I'm trying but can't reject some variation on a one~wage system; the closest I can get to rejection is a measured transition (which'll take a little time) to global one~wage introduction.[You're right on here__Star-Trek's Q' style computer chip controlled distribution systems_just never shown__Same as future 'one wage symmetry...']

Not trying to be difficult -
a little annoyed at myself (if anything) that I can't work out a solution to this problem.

~*~


How?

Stare at a whole buncha' pictures from the Hubble and observe (with commentary when we're ready) the repetitive motifs which occur up there relative to down here.[No doubt...]

Aside
Thinking so hard currently to work up a solution to this problem that my head is spinning, feeling sick, need to go the toilet, shaking and feeling both weak and uncontrollably hungry
- what a combination!

Aside II
The only question which has caused me this much of a meltdown (and which needs to be avoided) is why anything?[Because 'Nothing' is an impossibility_at the absolute limit_Thus 'Something' by necessity of existence, and logic's impossibility, otherwise...]

Why anything? and WTF money? are the two hardest problems -
- one of which (the former) - we'll never solve
- the other one of which we'll solve when we (don't laugh)
actually evolve
to better.

~*~

I don't think that a fair economic system can be found whilst we're in this current state of mind
- need a higher state of mind where scaleable fun can be envisionsed without the need for any form of purchasing power.

Ahhh yes... Let me see__En-vision the best state of humanity_then subtract backwards to our present mess_Take of the vision only what's absolutely best_Create new system which employs Incentives...rrr
M=C^e/e

\\|/
--o--
//|\

From here: Link to here: Link to here: Link to here: Link by way of here: Link and Not here: Link(follow order of links)(Did ya notice we're on page 39__3*13...? My favorite series_3's and 13's...)
"--- The citizen of the ideal state will require a currency for the purpose of every day expenses; This is practically indispensable for workers of all kinds and for such purposes as the payment of wages to wage earners. To meet these requirements, the citizen will possess a currency which will pass for value among themselves, but will not be accepted outside their own boundaries. But a stock of some currency common to the Hellenic world generally i.e., of international currency, will at all times be kept by the state for military expenditures or official missions abroad such as embassies and for any other necessary purposes of state. If a private citizen has occasion to go abroad, he will make his application to the government and go; and upon his return if he has any foreign currency left over in his possession, he will hand it over to the state receiving in exchange the equivalent in local currency." Plato
"All nations need a balance of payments system they can live with." Paul Davidson
"We must have a global balance of payments system capable of self-liquidating national debts." Paul Davidson
"A Unified Balance of Law Systems Is The Imperative of Global Solutions." me
"Democracy's Survival Requires The Middle Road of Exchange Clearing." me
"Without global transformation, national transformations are impossible." George Monbiot
"If we set a [production] standard of value (to control inflation and exchange rates) in one fifth of the entire economy, we can make real semi-limited use of the printing press –– while liquidating all state debts." L.G.
"Put money on a 20% wage and production standard and we can effectively semi-print real wealth." LG
"If we institute reasonable production standards, we can institute triple entry banking." LG

[Mikal]

Hi Lloyd…here is an example of deceitful Political Economics and how it has worked here in Canada.

Home building is on the rise here led by many independent young entrepreneurs. They have quickly gobbled up a portion of the market previously dominated by huge, international Companies. The legislation that supports these huge International Building Associations looks upon this interference into the Market Force as young tyrants attempting to take a piece of the pie from the big guys. Two of my son-in laws would be among these so called tyrants..

So those who legislate decided they needed to set up a program that would still allow the deceitful economic processes to function. This is how they did it….

They created an Organization called “Tarrion” under the guise that this program would completely protect home buyers from shady home builders and also from these young reputable builders stealing a piece of the pie.
First of all they put a ceiling on how many houses an Independent builder can build in one year. It does not matter if the builder can adequately carry out the building of 13 houses, the ceiling may be 10.

Secondly they made it mandatory that to be a part of Tarrion is a cost of $5000.00 entry fee. After that every house a reputable independent builder, builds one must give to this organization $5000.00 that is held for one year before it is apportioned back in incremental payments even though it is really the builders money, not theirs.
My one son-in law has been a real go-getter, has a huge team of employees he self-taught and is responsible for. The Organization now has $90,000.00 of his hard earned money!

I encouraged my son-in-law to goggle in “complaints against Tarrion.” This massive site came up with endless complaints but not against the builders, against the Organization because any legitimate complaint by a home buyer falls on deaf ears, dead communication lines and is never resolved.

Figure it out for yourself…what you could do with $90,000.00 per year and let’s say that increased by numerous reputable Independent Home Builders. Goodness the Investment possibilities are endless…illegally playing around with the honest, blood, sweat and tears work of legitimate builders and they never have to exert themselves into any of the work or might I add the responsibilities and headaches these young Independent entrepreneurs take on….


Regards Mikal