What’s next for SEEDS? shifting from GDP to prosperity

@page { margin: 0.79in } h1 { margin-bottom: 0.08in } h1.western { font-family: “Liberation Serif”, serif } h1.cjk { font-family: “Noto Sans CJK SC Regular”; font-size: 24pt } h1.ctl { font-family: “FreeSans”; font-size: 24pt } p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120% } a:link { so-language: zxx }

#126: What’s next for SEEDS?

Interview on You Tube ? Yes Please.

THOUGHTS ON FUTURE USE
With SEEDS (the Surplus Energy Economics Data System) now fully operational, it seems logical to wonder about the uses to which it can or should be put. If this discussion doesn’t provide answers, it can, at least, set out some thoughts which might be of interest. As ever, readers’ comments will be very welcome.
For starters, SEEDS wasn’t built with any commercial end in view, still less from any wish to influence policy. Rather, the aim of the project was “to see if it could be done” – could the principles of an economy determined by energy (and not, fundamentally, by money) form the basis of a new way of interpreting events, and forecasting outcomes?
Accomplishing this turned out to be even more difficult than had seemed likely at the outset.
I was prepared for the ‘linguistic’ challenge of expressing energy-based concepts in the
View original post 1,171 more words

A You Tube video would be great Tim, Could I interview on Skype and I can send HTML code to embed it on your Blog and for folk to share?
Here’s an Interview I did with David Malone.
123

and a series of Interviews with Roy Madron.
Still the priesthood fiddles when Rome burns.

Advertisements

Spooler Alert, A Twitter Discussion on Money? Will Rogers through to Ariadne here lies the Labyrinth.

Summarising and data mining Twitter for a summary of opinions expressed in a debate or for product preferences or an analysis of keywords can be useful. It also involves decisions as to how one filters the content out.

There is a tendency to want to Bumper sticker ideas and summary and concision is an enemy really of faceting complex systems, The Climate debate suffers from this tendency but so does the Field of Economics especially when it insists on pretending that Either money does not exist or that Politics does not exist or sometimes that both do not exist and every one acting in an Economic system are Totally Rational and operating with full knowledge of all possible system states.

Well I rose to the challenge when John Loundsbury tweeted this earlier today.

John Lounsbury‏ @jlounsbury59

FollowingFollowing @jlounsbury59
More
Replying to @jlounsbury59 @RogerGLewis and 10 others
This thread has gone on forever and circled on itself innumerable times. If someone could summarize it the result would be very significant. (I will not volunteer!!!)
12:05 AM – 19 May 2018
3 replies0 retweets1 like
Reply

3

 

Retweet

 

 

Like

1

 

Direct message

Roger Glyndwr LewisTweet text

    1. Replying to @jlounsbury59 @RogerGLewis and 9 others
      All about what is money, who controls it and can it be controlled efficiently to achieve a 2% inflation target.
      0 replies0 retweets0 likes
      Reply

       

       

      Retweet

       

       

      Like

       

       

      Direct message
    1. Replying to @jlounsbury59 @jbhearn and 9 others
      I was just about to embed it on the #ConquestofDough Blog I will see what I can do to summarise it today John.

I found this fun tool for turning Twitter threads into Blog Posts, here is what Daniel its programmer says about it.

https://tinysubversions.com/notes/building-spooler/

 

I made a Twitter app called Spooler. It turns Twitter threads into blog posts. Try it out! https://t.co/1SJwGtH5uq (early beta, expect bugs) pic.twitter.com/vNARR8HZrp

— Darius Kazemi (@tinysubversions) July 12, 2017

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Building Spooler

by Darius Kazemi, Jul 13, 2017
Note: This is blog post about design decisions. There is some code in it but you don’t have to know how to code to follow along. Special thanks to my Patreon backers, who are making it possible for me to write stuff like this far more regularly.
Yesterday I released Spooler, a tool that turns Twitter threads into blog posts. It was an unusual project for me—outside of professional work I do for clients, I normally don’t spend much longer than a day or two working on a project. Spooler took me a whole month of (sporadic) effort.
In the course of making Spooler, I had to make a number of different design decisions. I often make, uh, idiosyncratic design decisions, so I thought I’d talk about the process here.

A slow and flawed tool that actually exists

There were of course other design decisions I had to make. What choice of CSS to use, what the thing would look like on mobile, which websites to embed rich media from, and of course tons of technical design decisions around application architecture. But I hope that by outlining some of the more high-level design decisions I’ve maybe helped shed some light on why this app behaves the way it does.

Mostly I wanted to make a useful and thought-provoking thing. It has to work, but it doesn’t have to be fast. It has to be convenient, but not at the cost of other people’s privacy. And it has to actually exist, even if it’s a little flawed.

Spooler Does not scrape private data so Prof Werner’s contributions are sadly not used in the App so I have just pasted the parts of the discussion that Richard contributed below.

  • Mark Carney has suggested that the BofE cannot stop future crises. Thank goodness the Bank is prepared to use emergency interest rate policy to stall the monetary contraction that follows a crisis.
    4 replies3 retweets5 likes
    Reply

    4

     

    Retweet

    3

     

    Like

    5

     

    Direct message

Richard Werner‏ @ProfessorWerner

FollowingFollowing @ProfessorWerner
More
Replying to @jbhearn
If BoE says it is powerless to prevent crises then why does it need all its vast powers as central bank and banking and financial regulator, its political independence and absence of meaningful accountability?
9:10 PM – 9 May 2018
3 replies0 retweets3 likes
Reply

3

 

Retweet

 

 

Liked

3

Roger Glyndwr LewisTweet text

  1. New conversation

     

  2. Replying to @ProfessorWerner
    Good points. I think we both know that the BofE carries out a pretence of knowing what it is doing while it stumbles from one ill-conceived decision to the next
    1 reply0 retweets0 likes
    Reply

    1

     

    Retweet

     

     

    Like

     

     

    Direct message
  3.  

     

  4. Amazing how the Bank of Japan stumbled fr one worst case policy to the next,perpetually, for 30 years. What’s the probability of such a unique & unusual combination of “policy errors” that mimic the simple explanation of a plan to create a boom-bust cycle that maximises CB power?
    2 replies0 retweets4 likes
    Reply

    2

     

    Retweet

     

     

    Liked

    4

  5.  

     

  6. In both cases it shows that CBs do not really understand what monetary policy is & the limitations of what it can achieve. Keynesian ideas of strong fiscal policy & accommodating monetary policy causes them to buy into the boom bust myth which, rather than alleviate, they cause
    0 replies0 retweets0 likes
    Reply

     

     

    Retweet

     

     

    Like

     

     

    Direct message
  7. End of conversation

  8. New conversation

     

  9. A debate between you and Mosler would be very interesting. @RealProgressUS
    1 reply0 retweets3 likes
    Reply

    1

     

    Retweet

     

     

    Liked

    3

     

    Direct message
  10.  

     

  11. Yes, it would.
    3 replies0 retweets5 likes
  12.  

And Now we get to the Spooler Bit, which hopefully serves as an interesting summary. As spooler uses its own semantic and syntactical logic to create sentences this is not subject to any cherry picking from me.

A thread by John Hearn

Mark Carney has suggested that the BofE cannot stop future crises. Thank goodness the Bank is prepared to use emergency interest rate policy to stall the monetary contraction that follows a crisis. Economists like Mosler will always be applauded because they have wacky ideas that spend money from nowhere and aim to benefit everyone. When it all goes wrong they are still applauded because they cared and they tried. The economist who says it is not possible will be ignored. Thanks Warren.Just a taster for you:cost push inflation is a myth. CBs only control the average level of prices. Government should be forced by law to balance their budgets.There is a fractional reserve backing for currency. All economic cycles are caused by money mismanagement

 

All my policies are designed to explain the best peacetime solution. War requires a totally different approach and I hope I never see it in my lifetime. Any economist should be able to explain war. It is wrong to use war to describe socially important and responsible actions and government resources are limited and they do not have the real resources to solve all problems. A budget deficit is unwise during peacetime because it allocates resources inefficiently and hides the way government actions are financed. As you may have noticed budget deficits have not been used as Keynes suggested and in my mind have and will never be effective. Peacetime infrastructure spending is good and does not require a deficit on the budget.

A thread by John Lounsbury

Economists who run banks will always be applauded because they have wacky ideas that spend money from nowhere and aim to benefit a few. When it all goes wrong they are still applauded (and bailed out) because they exercised risk taking@wbmosler @StephanieKelton @ProfSteveKeen

 

Roger, Twitter is not best format for such an open ended question. I see money being created endogenously in the economy and believe there should be discussion of some being created exogenously. I see money as medium of exchange rather than store of value. cont. Money created only via credit as presently formulated creates by accounting a system in which not all credit can be repaid because the amount lent does not include money for interest and money for savings outside the credit issuing system. cont. The system precludes balancing the books on money flow and therefore ensures growth and contraction cycles with periodic debt deflation. Is there a more efficient system to sort out good from bad investments? Do we throw the baby out with the bath water sometimes?

A thread by mind_is_moving

“Government should be forced by law to balance their budgets.”

Imagine two countries of more or less equal size and equal resources who are at war. However, one has a balanced budget law and the other doesn’t. Which country will win the war? War is a social mobilization, and any economic theory worth its salt should be able to account for it. A “war” on greenhouse gas emissions would be another (better) kind of mobilization. A sovereign govt. always has the money to solve a problem if the real resources are there

You want a law mandating balanced budgets. You seem to concede the point that such a law would be counterproductive in war, so why wouldn’t it be similarly unwise at other times? A govt extracting the same credit from a non-maximized economy that it puts back in is anti-growth
Infrastructure creation happens in wartime economies and peacetime economies. There’s no reason that a deficit is acceptable, even desirable, in the former but not the latter

A thread by Steve Keen

Perhaps 10% of QE leaked into the real economy as fees for brokers & spent capital gains for share sellers, etc. That’s a trivial fraction of £2,000 bn over ten years, but it’s still not peanuts. Yes, as I argued in a submission to the Parliamentary Treasury Committee–which it unfortunately lost! Here’s the Minsky file I would have shown them had they been less careless with public submissions.
For the reasons Richard has previously stated. UK private sector deleveraging had largely stopped, credit was rising, expanding money & demand, and that was far more important than Brexit. See & (profstevekeen.com/data-on-credit…)(amazon.com/gp/aw/d/150951…)

A thread by John Lounsbury

Economists who run banks will always be applauded because they have wacky ideas that spend money from nowhere and aim to benefit a few. When it all goes wrong they are still applauded (and bailed out) because they exercised risk taking@wbmosler @StephanieKelton @ProfSteveKeen
Roger, Twitter is not the best format for such an open-ended question. I see money being created endogenously in the economy and believe there should be a discussion of some being created exogenously. I see money as a medium of exchange rather than a store of value. cont. Money created only via credit as presently formulated creates by accounting a system in which not all credit can be repaid because the amount lent does not include money for interest and money for savings outside the credit issuing system. cont. The system precludes balancing the books on money flow and therefore ensures growth and contraction cycles with periodic debt deflation. Is there a more efficient system to sort out good from bad investments? Do we throw the baby out with the bath water sometimes?

A thread by Roger Glyndwr Lewis

A thread by Roger Glyndwr Lewis

… #TurkeysandChristmas #So what do you know about money John or more precisely what are you beliefs about money? (letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/2018/05/to-ric…)
Daniel That’s a Straw Man, MMT is one interpretation of a policy position regarding the realities of Money Creation in late-stage financialised Capitalism. Positive Money is another and the American Public Finance Initiative (Ellen Brown ) another.
cont .. Benign role of Money? , John you have to be joking. Money is debt and Usury is ruining the planet. I think it is you that needs to start thinking, I already am. My Main influence is Kreutz ( The Money Syndrome) and Bernard Leitaer. (letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/2016/08/neo-li…)

 

 

Drop the Dollar? Prepare for War Wars

  • 339


  • 339 people are talking about this

A thread by TIM GOLDFINCH

Thread 👆👆👆
Surely increasing reserves increases the M1 aggregate? which is part of Broad money, of course, there’s no guarantee broader aggregates don’t shrink but Ceteris paribus surely it does
Sorry yes M0=” notes and coins in circulation + banks operational balances at the Bank of England”
But
“M4 money supply is defined as a measure of notes and coins in circulation (M0)+ bank accounts”So”reserves”are part of broader aggregates ? defined above (economicshelp.org/blog/5278/infl…)
In any case, if the CB increases the reserves and the banks use those reserves to satisfy increased demand from their clients to hold cash then the reserves will be translated into cash , increasing MO which is part of the M4 aggregate ,surely ? Agreed but no ifs post GFC, the demand to hold cash increased no doubt

A thread by Daniel Lacalle

Who increases the money supply and lowers rates? Central banks. it is so wrong it is not even funny. @ProfSteveKeen (mises.org/library/upside…)
Oil is not the main cause of war. At all
Spooler summaries that I initiated end there, there are lots of individual contributions all worth seeking out and considering.

The Thread is there and hopefully, John who started it will not delete it, the discussion has been temperate and very enjoyable. Often such discussions get deleted by disgruntled thread starters or Admins who claim rules’ breaches. This often happens in Climate discussions and also Holocaust discussions as for money, well Money hardly ever gets discussed I did an analysis of a Thread on Facebook in this post.

Brandon Weber
@brandon.weber.upw
I’m a labor union historian, educator, change catalyst, and a dreamer. I strongly believe in the ability of working people to kick ass via social media.

https://www.facebook.com/brandon.weber.upw/photos/a.561005373961970.1073741826.526961900699651/856915397704298/?type=3&comment_id=861278193934685
Brandon Weber´s meme posting on Facebook is a practical demonstration of the observation of Benjamin Franklin’s regarding ignorance of monetary policy in respect of general discourses on politics.

85000 views and 379 comments only One regarding the money power.
Number of mentions of money 1, One a SINGLE ONE.

In 1729 Benjamin Franklin wrote a pamphlet ´´A modest Enquiry into the nature and the necessity of a paper Currency.”

a modest enquiry,
”There is no Science, the Study of which is more useful and commendable than the Knowledge of the true Interest of one’s Country; and perhaps there is no Kind of Learning more abstruse and intricate, more difficult to acquire in any Degree of Perfection than This, and therefore none more generally neglected. Hence it is, that we every Day find Men in Conversation contending warmly on some Point in Politicks, which, altho’ it may nearly concern them both, neither of them understand any more than they do each other.
Thus much by way of Apology for this present Enquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper Currency. And if any Thing I shall say, may be a Means of fixing a Subject that is now the chief Concern of my Countrymen, in a clearer Light, I shall have the Satisfaction of thinking my Time and Pains well employed.
To proceed, then,
There is a certain proportionate Quantity of Money requisite to carry on the Trade of a Country freely and currently; More than which would be of no Advantage in Trade, and Less, if much less, exceedingly detrimental to it.
This leads us to the following general Considerations.”
http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-01-02-0041

https://letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/2016/11/the-giant-sucking-sound-sharp-intake-of.html

Nafta and EU enlargement are interesting siblings and of course, the promises made for CETA TTP and TTIP are all too redolent of the Apple not falling far from the tree.

 

First the comment that explained the probable meaning of Will Rogers in the Trickle down meme.

Mick Serridge Century of Enslavement: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy and the Federal Reserve Bank Conspiracy. The truth is that the Federal Reserve is not federal at all, but owned since 1913 by twelve super-wealthy International Banking families, such as the Rothschild’s and the Rockefellers. They are the ones that control this country behind the scenes. They make public enemies of anyone who questions their methods or throw light upon their obvious crimes. To understand this theory we must understand that the real power is not with the politicians, but with the International Bankers. The money powers preys upon the nation in times of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. What JFK did was to create interest-free government money, backed up by the silver reserve, contrary to the Federal Reserve money, which is not backed up by anything as we will see. He wanted to pay off the US debt this way. So by signing Executive Order 110, he was about to put the Federal Reserve Bank and the International Bankers out of business. The Federal Reserve Notes would eventually not be in demand anymore, and by doing so, Mr. Kennedy probably also signed his own death warrant. Executive Order 110 gave the U.S. the ability to create its own money backed up by silver. He obviously knew the secret about the Federal Reserve, and decided to follow the Constitution. Of course, this was a very dangerous thing to do, because if he was allowed to continue, it could put the International bankers out of business in the long run. So this was even more serious than to reorganize the CIA. This is a well hidden secret, but can even be verified in “Encyclopedia Britannica”, and by the statements in this article, as we shall see. This setup is against the US Constitution, where the government is supposed to create our money (the 16th Amendment), which should be backed up by gold and silver.

Unlike · Reply · 6 ·

Roger Lewis Great Comment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDe5kUUyT0

This Will Rogers meme and its large sample audience appeared to make a point in My Meet the Fuggers post about Brexit and Clueless elites Professor Richard Werner figures heavily in that very long post as well.

Brexit, The Euro and clueless Elites.

 

the PoSitive Money quiz Written and developed by David Faraday – Take the Quiz https://t.co/4Wp0AJz71N #quiz

— Roger Glyndwr Lewis (@RogerGLewis) May 19, 2018

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js


0046702273052
skype: rogerglewis
Skype telephone number +46406931188
Portfolio of on line Profiles( Go on be Nosy ) CLICK HERE PLEASE
#ConquestofDough