Davos: Two Worlds, Ready Or Not

[dothemaths]

Davos: Two Worlds, Ready Or Not

Simon Johnson has an interesting argument .... which I find compelling ....

The public policy issue of the day, from the point of view of such CEOs, is simple. There needs to be sufficient fiscal austerity to strengthen public balance sheets – so that states can more effectively stand behind their banks in the future, and to keep currencies from moving too much. Leading bankers, in particular, insisted on the paramount importance of providing unlimited government support to their sector during 2008-09; now they insist with equal or greater vigor that support to all other parts of society be curtailed.

This is where cognitive dissonance creeps in. Most CEOs feel that the provision of general public goods is not their responsibility, although they are very happy to help guide (or capture) the provision of public goods specific to their firm.

[needsleep]

Davos: Two Worlds, Ready Or Not

Simon Johnson has an interesting argument .... which I find compelling ....

Chilling isn't it. The bankers don't seem to see this crisis as a one-off and if we're honest we know they want to come back for more public money. They are now competing for public funds that would otherwise be used for public services.

[dothemaths]

Chilling isn't it. The bankers don't seem to see this crisis as a one-off and if we're honest we know they want to come back for more public money. They are now competing for public funds that would otherwise be used for public services.

As societies, this is collective suicide... it is hard to be optimistic given our current leaders and the alternatives are no better .

[Guest UK Debt Slave]

As societies, this is collective suicide... it is hard to be optimistic given our current leaders and the alternatives are no better .

My way of looking at things is:

For me personally, things are looking pretty $hite frankly

For humanity, I think we will come out of the other side just fine, albeit at a huge cost in lives.

It makes you realise how powerless as an individual you really are, especially in a world populated by so many people so blissfully unaware how vile the global elite really are.

I remain pessimistic for the near future of mankind..............and myself

[nixy]

My way of looking at things is:

For me personally, things are looking pretty $hite frankly

For humanity, I think we will come out of the other side just fine, albeit at a huge cost in lives.

It makes you realise how powerless as an individual you really are, especially in a world populated by so many people so blissfully unaware how vile the global elite really are.

I remain pessimistic for the near future of mankind..............and myself

We need to have taught, stealing and dishonesty are wrong....... NON NEGOTIABLE.

Seems very odd to have to say this, but this IS the fundamental cause.

[The Spaniard]

The schism between the 'Two Worlds' is that the banking sector lends everyone else their means of exchange, and so exerts far, far too much power over both our economies and our politics. This excessive power has led inevitably to massive greed, corruption and so on.

It is fundamentally wrong.

Any sovereign nation can and should organize its own publicly issued, debt-free, persistently circulating money supply.

Why must we borrow into existence and pay interest on the ephemeral tokens issued by commercial money lenders, just to have a medium of exchange with which to do business with one another?

Let's transform the essentially unproductive banking sector into a genuinely competitive service 'industry' whose primary functions are then to warehouse our money and to facilitate the deals whereby we lend that money to each other.

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

[StainlessSteelCat]

We need to have taught, stealing and dishonesty are wrong....... NON NEGOTIABLE.

Seems very odd to have to say this, but this IS the fundamental cause.

Only the poor can afford morals.

We are taught stealing is wrong so we don't upset the status quo. The rich and powerful are taught that it is their entitlement.

Edited January 30, 2011 by greencat

[nixy]

Only the poor can afford morals.

We are taught stealing is wrong so we don't upset the status quo. The rich and powerful are taught that it is their entitlement.

You are, IMO, overcomplicating the issues, to the advantage of those who would prefer you 'muddy the water'.

First principle......stealing and dishonesty are wrong .....agreed?? .........

Agree this first, as a fundamental principle, then, by all means move on to the rich / poor thing.

[nixy]

The schism between the 'Two Worlds' is that the banking sector lends everyone else their means of exchange, and so exerts far, far too much power over both our economies and our politics. This excessive power has led inevitably to massive greed, corruption and so on.

It is fundamentally wrong.

Any sovereign nation can and should organize its own publicly issued, debt-free, persistently circulating money supply.

Why must we borrow into existence and pay interest on the ephemeral tokens issued by commercial money lenders, just to have a medium of exchange with which to do business with one another?

Let's transform the essentially unproductive banking sector into a genuinely competitive service 'industry' whose primary functions are then to warehouse our money and to facilitate the deals whereby we lend that money to each other.

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

Could such a system exist without stealing and/or dishonesty?

[The Spaniard]

Could such a system exist without stealing and/or dishonesty?

The present system facilitates institutionalized extortion.

As we see, the banking sector holds everyone else to ransom.

Why? Because it can.

We need urgently to reform the absurd manner in which our society provides itself with a viable means of exchange.

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

[StainlessSteelCat]

You are, IMO, overcomplicating the issues, to the advantage of those who would prefer you 'muddy the water'.

First principle......stealing and dishonesty are wrong .....agreed?? .........

Agree this first, as a fundamental principle, then, by all means move on to the rich / poor thing.

I can agree with you until I'm blue in the face. But the elites do not and will not. They have been stealing for millenia and see no reason to change. The system they designed actually encourages it. That's the cold reality.

Edited January 30, 2011 by greencat

[nixy]

The present system facilitates institutionalized extortion theft.

As we see, the banking sector holds everyone else to ransom.

Why? Because it can.

We need urgently to reform the absurd dishonest manner in which our society provides itself with a viable an honest means of exchange.

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

Sorry..... had to adjust to first principles.

[nixy]

I can agree with you until I'm blue in the face. But the elites do not and will not. They have been stealing for millenia and see no reason to change. The system they designed actually encourages it. That's the cold reality.

Ah yes, but some think wealth is synonymous with theft and dishonesty....... which really complicates things...... especially as it is not true.

Edited January 30, 2011 by nixy

[The Spaniard]

We need urgently to reform the dishonest manner in which our society provides itself with an honest means of exchange.

[nixy]

opps..... and so my entire argument collapses.

It's too early for all this thinking stuff......

[numper]

Property is theft! (French: La propriété, c'est le vol!) is a slogan coined by French anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in his 1840 book What is Property? Or, an Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government.

If I were asked to answer the following question: What is slavery? and I should answer in one word, It is murder!, my meaning would be understood at once. No extended argument would be required . . . Why, then, to this other question: What is property? may I not likewise answer, It is robbery!, without the certainty of being misunderstood; the second proposition being no other than a transformation of the first?

—Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, What is Property?

By "property," Proudhon referred to the Roman law concept of the sovereign right of property—the right of the proprietor to do with his property as he pleases, "to use and abuse," so long as in the end he submits to state-sanctioned title, and he contrasted the supposed right of property with the rights (which he considered valid) of liberty, equality, and security.

ere

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWLRbLQiiZI

Edited January 30, 2011 by numper

[stormymonday_2011]

ere

This always my favourite quote from Proudhon

To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place[d] under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality.

says it all really

[nixy]

This always my favourite quote from Proudhon

says it all really

Really??

I don't think so.

If all those who are dishonest are shown for what they are.....LIARS.......via a website such as spottheliar.com, then most (self serving vested interest) government would end.??

By way of an example ............ to keep us safe, we need government ................ honest or dishonest??

[stormymonday_2011]

Really??

I don't think so.

If all those who are dishonest are shown for what they are.....LIARS.......via a website such as spottheliar.com, then most (self serving vested interest) government would end.??

By way of an example ............ to keep us safe, we need government ................ honest or dishonest??

The state is not capable of being honest or dishonest anymore than are corporations. Their personality is a legal fiction. They have no consciousness or conscience nor any true means of understanding conventional morality. One of the most corrosive elements of western culture is the notion of corporate personality which assigns some of the attributes of human beings to abtract entities. The whole concept is deeply flawed. It has provided the perfect excuse and cover for all forms of individual dishonesty and crime. Our society will not be fixed until these protections are removed and people in power within the institutions have to take personal responsibilities for their actions.

Once you recognise that morality lies in the sphere of the individual then you have the position that to create a perfect world you have to have perfect people. Religions have understood that for centuries which is they place such emphasis on personal behaviour. Of course the reality is that the world is never going to be made up of perfect people. Nor can any system of government legislate people into being virtuous. It merely can adopt a moral code and then seek to control or punish those who breach it. In fact the best forms of governance are those based on a recognition that such systems work best when they apply limits to the abuse of wealth and power to corrupt, dishonest and overmighty individuals and groups within the body politic, and to the institutions of government itself. The worst systems of government are those where the institutions merely act as prop, justification and protection for the dishonest, corrupt and overmighty within society, or where preserving the privileges of institutions and mechanisms of government becomes an end in itself.

No prizes for guessing which model the UK is heading towards.

Edited January 30, 2011 by stormymonday_2011

[nixy]

The state is not capable of being honest or dishonest anymore than are corporations. Their personality is a legal fiction. They have no consciousness or conscience nor any true means of understanding conventional morality. One of the most corrosive elements of western culture is the notion of corporate personality which assigns some of the attributes of human beings to abtract entities. The whole concept is deeply flawed. It has provided the perfect excuse and cover for all forms of individual dishonesty and crime. Our society will not be fixed until these protections are removed and people in power within the institutions have to take personal responsibilities for their actions.

Once you recognise that morality lies in the sphere of the individual then you have the position that to create a perfect world you have to have perfect people. Religions have understood that for centuries which is they place such emphasis on personal behaviour. Of course the reality is that the world is never going to be made up of perfect people. Nor can any system of government legislate people into being virtuous. It merely can adopt a moral code and then seek to control or punish those who breach it. In fact the best forms of governance are those based on a recognition that such systems work best when they apply limits to the abuse of wealth and power to corrupt, dishonest and overmighty individuals and groups within the body politic, and to the institutions of government itself. The worst systems of government are those where the institutions merely act as prop, justification and protection for the dishonest, corrupt and overmighty within society, or where preserving the privileges of institutions and mechanisms of government becomes an end in itself.

No prizes for guessing which model the UK is heading towards.

Of course the reality is that the world is never going to be made up of perfect people. Nor can any system of government legislate people into being virtuous. It merely can adopt a moral code and then seek to control or punish those who breach it.

.....what's a moral code if not honest?? We're not talking perfection here...... sh1t happens, mistakes are made etc. which is not the same as deliberate lies...... as I suggested by way of an example, we are told by some, 'to keep us safe we need government'. Is that statement moral?

[dothemaths]

The present system facilitates institutionalized extortion.

As we see, the banking sector holds everyone else to ransom.

Why? Because it can.

We need urgently to reform the absurd manner in which our society provides itself with a viable means of exchange.

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

The BBC parrots rubbish without questioning the status quo

http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-12318231

Ellen Kullman, chief executive of DuPont, agreed, but acknowledged that 2010 had been "a fantastic year for growth, and 2011 will still be good."

Whoever one spoke to, whether it was Michael Dell, founder of the computer giant carrying his name, Kris Gopalakrishnan of IT services firm Infosys or Wei Jiafu of China Ocean Shipping Group: everybody reported really strong growth and predicted investments and expansion.

One banker, at a private meeting, spoke of "boom times".

A survey of bosses from around the world, compiled by accounting firm Pricewaterhouse Coopers and published at the eve of the Forum, suggested that confidence levels were back to pre-crisis levels.

[erranta]

You are, IMO, overcomplicating the issues, to the advantage of those who would prefer you 'muddy the water'.

First principle......stealing and dishonesty are wrong .....agreed?? .........

Agree this first, as a fundamental principle, then, by all means move on to the rich / poor thing.

The "Muddy Waters" (BLUES) come after they have been dammed up - coz 'the 'stream' flow is slowed down/silted up like some "Deltas" I could name with 'egyptian' sounding names!

You can't see the 'stones' 'n 'rocks' no more!

Edited January 30, 2011 by erranta

[alexw]

The present system facilitates institutionalized extortion.

As we see, the banking sector holds everyone else to ransom.

Why? Because it can.

We need urgently to reform the absurd manner in which our society provides itself with a viable means of exchange.

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

You might like this, not 100% accurate in some of the assumptions it makes later on, but thought provoking all the same.

[erranta]

.....what's a moral code if not honest?? We're not talking perfection here...... sh1t happens, mistakes are made etc. which is not the same as deliberate lies...... as I suggested by way of an example, we are told by some, 'to keep us safe we need government'. Is that statement moral?

I was always useless at back-spin playing Golf!

My father was a PrO - had spin(Ms Webb) down to a 'T'!

The population should vote on how many decades we go back - when things unravel for the Establishment!

When the time comes - the 'code' of behaviour (etiqette of play) is "Give it 'back'"

[ken_ichikawa]

By way of an example ............ to keep us safe, we need government ................ honest or dishonest??

Thats what the pro statists want you to think, that you have to put up wth their theiving and corruption other wise anarchy will reign. They play Mortons fork.... i.e. without government we'd turn into Somalia over night. We wouldn't...

There are quite a few communities around the world which were in a state of collective anarchy which functioned hunky dory. Walled City Kowloon for instance, or the gigantic shanty towns in the philipines and India, they are self governming mini city states with no real elected head of state where force applied is equal crime might be high but is crime low in the civilised governed societies? If everybody there was murdered and raped would those societies even exist?