Ron - I agree that is as it is. Money is there for manipulation. It was originally to help the barter. Now it is a system all by itself. Its production is zilch. It is just working for political reasons. Maybe I am naive. you know I heard almost 30 years ago when i moved to the US that leadership and management was control over the workforce and to get the maximum for minmum pay. Today the theory is coming close to what I believed already at that time. Companies like Google are my believe but I do think they grown to big to survive as a forefront in this regards. You say that all the fancy stuff Wall street are inventing is 'unregulated'. No, not at all. That is products / functions created as a pay back to the regulator as a benefit. When the system brakes down there are two parties to take responsibilities and that is the regulators, which was well aware but wanted Wall street to get this perk and than the greedy Wall street itself. It is not unregulated - you and I could not start businesses with this type of products. If I believed in laissez faire that would be naive. I believe in simple system with a minimum of regulations and a minimum of 'products'. Ian showed the ideas I think are needed. Not that I believe that this is exactly how it could /should be done. Rather that a change is required and that technology can replace the many outdated laws we have. Everything changes except for the political system. I would rather see that we change the current format to a working modern system. The alternative is some kind of revolution, when the system becomes so obsolete that it implodes. I think that type of change is negative and I think that to search for improvement in a moderate pace is better. The real problem is that we are moving very fast to the point of no return, by constantly 'improving' the existing system. Change is necessary and if it is a continuous process it is easy and uneventful. Evaluate the situation - make a plan for what could work better - implement that plan - evaluate . . . .
Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Craig Haynie <cchayniepub...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2015-08-13 at 17:57 +0100, Ian Walker wrote: > > Hi all > > > > In all honesty we need to consider a post capitalism world. > > > http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2015/aug/12/paul-mason-capitalism-failing-time-to-panic-video?CMP=fb_us > > > > > There are only two types of economies that have been demonstrated in the > world: An economy which allows people to trade freely; and an economy > which commands all production and distribution. To date, no one has > demonstrated how the latter can replace the former. The narrator in the > video, above, equates capitalism with violence, but there is no causal > link between the two. Free trade does not lead to mass surveillance, > wars, and riot squads. He is, rather, equating a philosophy based on > violence with a philosophy based on free trade, where no such > relationship can be shown to exist. > > Craig > > > >
