Home » Welcome

About ‘Money and Sustainability’

Submitted by on 28/05/2012 – 11:242 Comments

We tend to assume that we must have a single, monopolistic currency, funded through bank debt, enforced by a central bank. But we don’t need any such thing! In fact, the present system is outdated, brittle and unfit for purpose (witness the eurozone crisis). Like any other monoculture, it’s profitable at first but ultimately a recipe for economic and environmental disaster. The alternative is a monetary ‘ecosystem’, with complementary currencies alongside the conventional one. Stop waiting, join the game now with wunderino bonus continuous luck and many victories await you!

The top provide intended for gamblers jugar bingo online . Come on. Higher probability of succeeding!


  • We desperately need not only a new money system, but a better democracy system, too!For realizing the new money-system and more!

    get more about constitutional assemblys and citizen senates for germany, belgium, EU, world:

    http://ob-in-spe.de >Kategorie DEMOKRATIEINNOVATION: Konvent, Senat…

    Kindest regards!

    Towards a better world, better futures!

  • Planck says:

    This book is so helpful in putting the various economics thought paradigms in context. It is clear that removing money from the pedagogy means that no questions will be asked and the owners of the current private bank credit money system will be able to continue without being challenged. This is a masterful use of foundation funding of universities and publishing companies.

    The internal constraints programmed into the money creation process ensure that collateral will be seized at the end of every credit cycle. The missing “rounds” for interest, as in the tale about the stranger coming to town with his new money form, ensure that property will be grabbed by the owners of the banks. This explains why wealth concentrates under this system, yet someone like Thomas Piketty does not see the money creation process as the root cause behind this.

    The game is also plainly evident now that public sector resources and infrastructure built up over centuries with public money are being grabbed as collateral now by the wealthiest as private property now, even though these debts never had a chance of being repaid owing to the natural exponential compounding of missing interest.

    Another blind spot in the middle of all this is the unquestioned acceptance of monopoly rents collected from nature or value created by society. The privatization can only work if fees are freely paid out to the rentiers who, through money system flaws, get to claim ownership of land, nature, or other socially created commons resources like roads, tunnels, bridges, grids, patents, etc.

    This is what is happening now in Europe. Public assets are being privatized with the full expectation that monopoly rents will be paid out in the future from tax payers to these 1% of 0.1% beneficial owners profiting from the austerity crisis. The game only works because this kind of monopoly ownership is not questioned by our current collective understanding.

    These ideas are similar to the ones of Henry George, another economic thinker not mentioned in any of the economic paradigms. He proposed tax methods to recapture these unfair monopoly economic rents and return the value of social creation back to society. These taxes would also ensure that nature could not be exploited to create private fortunes. If this kind of commons ownership property right were challenged massively, it would also be impossible for wealth to be grabbed this way.

    The two mechanisms seem to work in tandem. The invisible money system ensures that natural resources or public goods are privatized at the eventual crisis moment when austerity can be forced in. And, the unquestioned capture of monopoly rents from nature, society, or commons ensures that the 1% rentiers owners collect taxes and tolls forever from the 99%. Henry George challenged this notion. That must also be why his work is never cited. The Economist magazine recently referred to him as a “journalist and activist”. Yet, his version of economics sold millions of copies during the late-1800s. That was before the American Economics Association was created and economists “professionalized” i.e. licensed based on pre-qualifications of limited thinking.

    Like the missing money question, the missing Henry George question also seems conspicuous now that we see how the current game relies on our collective amnesia about key economics and justice concepts.

3 Pingbacks »

Leave a comment!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.