Text archives Help


Re: [projectvrm] Banking and the Micropayment


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Tom Crowl < >
  • To: Jason Wong < >
  • Cc: David Brin < >, Guy Higgins < >, Douglas Rushkoff < >, Micah Sifry < >, "Victoria Silchenko, PhD" < >, ProjectVRM list < >, Andy Oram < >, Joe Trippi < >, John Battelle < >, Michel Bauwens < >, Brennan Center for Justice < >, HARIHARAN PV < >
  • Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Banking and the Micropayment
  • Date: Sun, 15 May 2016 14:04:27 -0700

Its a simple definition which attempts to avoid ideological complications... and frankly, in my opinion should also apply to socialism. (named ideological formulas often become bars to rational thinking and instead become hooks for various rationalizations).

For instance. I have a friend in India. He's an engineer who's had his own companies in the past. An older man who's been part of the growing "middle class" in India... and now trying  to institute changes.

But he sees that as only reaching a small percentage (relative to the population as a whole)... and it doesn't seem to have good prospects for expanding beyond this small percentage.

 He's trying to take a very practical approach to rural development there and around the world... with very little support. In essence he's trying to find technologies for the 900,000 small villages who can then use local resources and local skills (and education and skills with this population is very limited) to create village based companies to trade and market their products.

(thus advancing education and a belief in the possibility of change which is lacking in this population).

Sort of co-op companies built around these small communities to develop as productive units. Is this "Capitalism" or "Socialism"?
Frankly, I don't care.

He despises Western Finance and what he believes are its effects in India... the suicides of 100's of thousands of small farmers trapped by debt... and a market which pushed them into cotton farming for the world market... and forcing them to use Monsanto seeds... 

Meaning that they could no longer save seeds from year to year.... but were forced to buy new seeds every year. He sees this as a model which is trapping people in a system that isn't theirs.. and isn't really looking out for them

He has many burdens... especially (in my opinion) a rural population that has little belief that change is possible... and sees a government disconnected from these concerns. (no social proximity)

He likes my idea about "moneyed pockets" which can use national currencies and promote public banking because he sees how that might allow local trading currencies to operate along side of that... though he also believes the tech in rural areas is not yet at the stage where they could really use such a system.

That's not the case here and much of the world... but the global financial system is very ossified and frankly, excessively self-satisfied.... convinced of their "superior" views on how Capitalism should operate. This is how at least some "non-crazy" people see globalization.. and why its not going to go as smoothly as some seem to think.

In my opinion.

I manage his Facebook page: 
Sustainable Development & Poverty Alleviation
https://www.facebook.com/SustainableDevelopmentPovertyAlleviation/

From Hariharan PV 

"India has about 900 million people (of all ages put together) whose real incomes are not even $150 percapita. Our problems take us to pathetic levels because our Leaders and so-called development Scientists, Economists, Planners and even Nobel Laureates DO NOT work on the basis of OUR NEEDS, Our Resources and Our Human resources available. Our Education system, Agriculture, Industry, and almost all things are based on Trickle effects from the developments in the western world. The entire Economy works on the basis of just 300 million People out of 1280 million, relegating the 980 million into the dust. Every other nation also would be looking at ONLY this 300 million population for selling their wares etc. India's current GDP is $2.5 trillion, and only 6% of this is enjoyed by the 980 million - truth that is smothered out in the Macro level presentations. Some of us are working hard to change this through DISPERSED Developments whereby over 650,000 villages/ slums/ tribal regions could be converted into 900,000 productive wealth creation centers - each averaging about $8 million - ultimately taking the GDP to over $10 Trillion. But mainstream economists and Government become hurdles.. but we are working hard."


On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Jason Wong < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
Good definition of capitalism. I wonder if post capitalism might actually mean post industrialism in this new, decentralized, digitized, democratized, and disinflationary age. 

Jason D. Wong MD MPH MBA, FACOG


(c) 301-675-1970

Yes, destruction of records reaches back centuries in insurrections.

As for "post capitalist"... not sure. I"m waiting for a realization that the essence of capitalism (in my mind) is reward for innovation and hard work... while broadly supporting public service and equality of opportunity... and curtailing the excesses which occur without meaningful checks and balances.




On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Jason Wong < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
For the post capitalists out there, check out photo 4/7.  For those of you that don't read the wsj on principle, this article is free.

Burn those darn stock certificates. Yay!




On Tuesday, May 10, 2016, David Brin < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
And yet look around you. I refute cynics thus... by pointing to this incredible ongoing enlightenment revolution, that has lasted five times longer that Pericles's earlier experiment, accomplishing vastly more. It did not just happen.  The revolution is under constant threat -- nowadays from an attempted oligarchic-feudalist putsch. But each generation managed to do politics well enough to keep it moving forward.

BTW: Today, Evonomics ran my appraisal of how Advertising is failing the Internet. I explore how a real Web economy might replace the maelstrom of ads. Could simple micro-payments work, paying pennies for what you use? I’ve been working on this analysis for 3 years. A two-parter with major implications for your future online.


I am grateful to those of you who supplied valuable feedback.  And I highly recommend the Evonomics site.


On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 2:10 PM, Guy Higgins < > wrote:


Interestingly, I suspect that almost the entire U.S. Constitution was a “five beers” idea — in 1783.  Those guys took a bunch of theorizing by Enlightenment philosophers, seasoned it with lots of practical experience and invented democratic government (and if we think there was agreement across the board, joe should look at the Ten Dollar bill and recall how differences were settled then — Mssrs Hamilton and Burr)

Guy

From: Jason Wong < >
Date: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 14:04
To: David Brin < >
Cc: Guy Higgins < >, Tom Crowl < >, Douglas Rushkoff < >, Micah Sifry < >, "Victoria Silchenko, PhD" < >, ProjectVRM list < >, Andy Oram < >, Joe Trippi < >, John Battelle < >, Michel Bauwens < >, Brennan Center for Justice < >
Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Banking and the Micropayment

Agree! Results count.

Disagree on the five beers. As an Asian I can't drink five beers. I think it has to do with not having a certain enzyme!

Jason D. Wong MD MPH MBA, FACOG


On May 10, 2016, at 3:41 PM, David Brin < > wrote:

Instead of cludged prescription that sound really cool over one's fifth beer, how about this unique idea.  Actually restore something called "politics" as a process of sober negotiation engaged-in by adults?   
    
    Your own cynical-dismissive chuckle, upon reading the previous sentence is THE major symptom of a disease that has been deliberately inflicted upon us by those whose core aim is to stymie one of the most important problem-solving modes of the Western Enlightenment. Destroying politics as a grownup and serious process of negotiation has been nothing less than treason.

There is no pretending equality of blame. Let's take Jason's sunset clause for regulations... a real five beer proposal. How about instead responsibly auditing agencies and deliberating which ones to revise or cancel?  You might imagine republicans do this, but when they had complete control over all three branches of government -- from 2001 through 2007 -- they eliminated zero agencies and only deregulated Wall Street and resource extraction, two deregulations for which we paid trillions.

(In fairness, in 1996 the Congressional GOP did banish and eliminate their own bipartisan Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) which kept offering up inconvenient "facts.")

So which party banished the captured Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) or the captured Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) restoring competition to airlines and rails?  Who broke up AT&T's monopoly? Who deregulated GPS and who pushed through the famous bill unleashing the Internet upon the world? I could go on, but you might guess the answer by now, know it was Al Gore's bill that did that last miracle.

There is no "balance" here.  One party still wants to engage in pragmatic, negotiated politics.  The other will not sit at the table.  They have made it declared policy to burn the table.



On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 11:47 AM, Jason Wong < > wrote:


How about this- constitutional amendment every ten years for a complete top down review of all federal laws, regulations and executive directives. Mandatory cleaving of ( % ) of the above, and disestablishment of any laws greater than 50 years old.  That will solve the historical issue of empires and nations failing over due to the sheer weight of oppression. 

Jason D. Wong MD MPH MBA, FACOG


On May 10, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Guy Higgins < > wrote:

This is kind of a squirrel, but I think that some of the ideas that the illustrious Mr. Heinlein listed in The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress were even more interesting:
  • Elect representatives by private sector “career” — doctors would vote for someone to represent them, engineers would vote for someone to represent them, etc.  The question of course is would there be representative for career criminals ;-)
  • Voters aggregate alphabetically rather than geographically — that would force a national legislature to view bills differently and force local councils/legislatures to focus on local issues (which my neighbors seem incapable of doing — they are far more interested in solving other peoples’ problems; sigh…)
  • Hold an election and then randomly choose 60% of the winners and fill out the legislature by choosing the remaining 40% random





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.