TED Conversations

Trevor Rose

This conversation is closed.

Evolving a new system of economic interaction not based on limited supply currency

I have been developing (with a good friend of mine) a way to replace our existing global systems of limited supply currency based economics with something new.

I have been developing a new methodology of sharing the profits of human endeavour.

I have developed a business system around this, which will enable it to come into being, evolve & grow... but I need non-traditional funding to get it started, and I will also need a lot of very smart people on board to help me develop & evolve the new system, as well as its many various projects.

The core systems are based on the principles of ecological systems modelling.

One of the key elements of this new system is that nature itself is fundamentally considered to be one of the "share holders", and thus must always be compensated for its investment.

This must be done, because no matter how sustainable we make our technologies, it is our economic system itself which is undermining our efforts, which is socially & environmentally unsustainable now, and always will be.

It is amazing in this information age, that our currency is "information dumb", and by this, I mean that it says absolutely nothing other than how much of it there is. Currency only has that one piece of data, its face "value", but as this number is not scientifically connected to anything at all, the term "value" is a complete misnomer.

I know there are still many people in the world with money & power who would be afraid of such a change, because they would see it as the diminishing of their empire & power... but all things must change. What this is really all about is developing a new system for economic interaction between people which does not create slaves, but instead empowers people, and where resources are not wasted, but always put to the best use we know how.

I want to know who out there will join with me in seeing this thing made, this is no longer just a theory, it can be done, and only needs now money & people on board to make it happen.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb

    R H 30+

    • 0
    May 27 2012: I'm not sure what you mean by 'limited supply currency'. Gov'ts print as much as they want whenever they want. Could you please explain. Also, your new econ system has 'nature' as a shareholder, but I'm not sure what is traded or 'shares of what?'. If there is no internationally agreed-upon medium of exchange, what will we trade with each other? What would be the basis of trade amongst mankind in this 'new system'?
    • thumb
      May 27 2012: currency is always in limited supply, there is never an infinite amount of currency in circulation, that is impossible. Look at it as a snap shot in time, there is never anything other than a certain amount of currency in supply. Their ability to print new money does not change this.

      So far as what is traded, nothing is traded... information is RECORDED... and the information which is recorded, is a mathematically determined contribution that each element of a system makes with respect to a desired outcome... aspects of efficiency (over & under-driving a system) are included in these calculations according to the principles of Maximum Power / Maximum emPower (see the works of the late Howard Odum on ecological systems modelling & the related use of thermodynamics - energy, emergy, transformity, exergy, entropy etc.)

      Nature therefore is a contributor to all processes, as much as a person or resource is also a contributor... the respective value of each input with respect to the desired output can be calculated, and there is at least 1 group i know of already gathering this data, though the form in which it needs to be gathered for this application is slightly different, i believe the numbers can be converted... and the initially skeletal system, will evolve over time (internally) to become more sophisticated

      the shares are a modification of an existing financial instrument called a redeemable preference share, and they are shares in the various projects which would be conducted to make financial profit in the existing financial system... even though, it is the objective ultimately to replace this system, as the new internal system evolves.

      So the system evolving internally within this company, must interface externally to the rest of the world & the existing financial framework, which is does (through the share mechanism alluded to).

      So the basis of trade is ultimately no longer a basis of trade, it is a basis of getting things done, and recording value of input
      • thumb
        May 28 2012: that sounds great, would fit as a end point in my plan to sustainability. I have just been reading some stuff about the plans of the White Dragon Society, similar stuff but with "posable heavy ramifications", not sure about alot of this stuff but some of it makes more sence than mass media take:

        The White Dragon Society proposes using humanity’s savings to end war, end poverty and stop environmental destruction. After that, humanity can be set on a path of exponential expansion into the universe. Our savings and our future planning can be devoted to such attainable goals as increased longevity, improved human abilities, free energy, the creation of new eco-systems, the expansion of life in all its forms and anything else scientifically possible and morally permissible that we can dream of.

        The White Dragon Foundation has been set up in order to attain these goals. It will carry them out by means of a meritocratically staffed international economic planning agency.

        There are indications coming from all over that the Old World Order is waging an all out offensive on all fronts in order to maintain its grip on global power.

        The world now faces a clear choice between the genocidal, racist religious fanatics who want to murder 5 billion people and a group that wants to end poverty, end war, stop environmental destruction and start a Golden Age.

        For more information: http://benjaminfulford.net

        look forward to your thoughts
        • thumb
          May 28 2012: to be honest Geoff, I havent seen anything from anyone in the entire world yet that makes what I have been working on a component of their "thing"... and for the most part, with all due respect, all you seem to have is a very vague idea about something, with no particular strategic plan of making it happen... and I did a quick search on this white dragon society, and didnt find much... and dont particular relish the chance to go on wild goose chases... so if you have something valuable to contribute, that;s great i would love to hear it... but dont expect me to get excited about anything vague or ephemeral... i am way too cynical for that
      • thumb

        R H 30+

        • 0
        May 28 2012: Ok. That helps. Thanks. So we get a mathematical value recorded for our efforts. Someone/group/commitee has set a value for the contribution that nature provides, therefore balancing the impact 'humans' can have on the natural world, giving nature a 'voice', so to speak, in our decisions regarding it's welfare (I hope I'm getting this right). 'Wire transfers' may be the precursor to such an exchange. Very interesting. It seems reasonable that we will develop some sort of economic numerical value to natural resources since our impact is on the verge of 'overselling' natural capacity. Maybe we could assess some value to the poor and exploited people of the world also which could provide adequate consideration for them. Thanks for the idea and good luck!
        • thumb
          May 29 2012: no, there is no decisions made by a committee, it is all based on ecological systems modelling & maths... and it is all automated behind the scenes (eventually), because it is not the kind of thing the average person can wrap their brain around 20 times a day... all they need to do, is have their activities & the outcomes & data relating to their activities logged, the system then makes the calculations for them.

          if decisions were made by a committee, that would make them as arbitrary as the existing financial system which is based on such ludicrous things as emotion, confidence, and bargaining position... none of which is directly tied to any physical phenomena that makes any sense to tie it to, or is in any way anything by highly variable.

          in brief, the process of ecological systems modelling is to define a boundary for a system you wish to analyse, this could be a pond, an office, or a community next to a forest... the model contains all the resources & elements of that system, and it also contains data about each element, & its interactions with other elements... and there is also data about the inputs & outputs of that system (which means that system once modelled, can then be treated like a "black-box" and its inputs can be mapped from the outputs of another system, and its own outputs can be mapped to the inputs of a system... and sometimes there is feedback from an output back into the same system as an input.

          this is a universal modelling language which can be applied to any system. what we model, is energy & emergy.. energy is measured in Joules, and emergy (embodied energy) is measured in emjoules (basically the same thing, except they are not free the way energy is)... kind of like the difference between kinetic & potential energy (but still different again).

          what this system would enable internally for the business which generates it, is an extremely efficient set of processes for its competitiveness against other businesses.
      • thumb

        R H 30+

        • 0
        May 30 2012: Ok. I think I'm getting closer to understanding. So now I have some philosophical considerations. This system is 'all automated behing the scenes'. So 'someone' has to program it - to set it up. Someone has to evaluate what 'resources and elements of that system' need to be included in the calculations. It seems we would be reducing the human experience into non-empirical data. Unlike the rest of nature and the 'systems' we have observed and evaluated, humanity has consciousness and 'learns' from experience and time. It creates its own realities as it progresses. Our 'models' expire as we advance, and we don't take kindly to living within systematic limitations. The current markets and financial systems evolved freely from trial and error, and are open to constant fluctuations and shifts of emphasis. Our scientific and mathematical capabilities are impressive, but our ecological system observations and evaluations are based on these limited capabilities. To 'systemetize' human endeavors and economic behavior with an 'automated' exchange loop as a result of these observations would seem to be obsolete upon installation. We are constantly re-evaluating our understanding of the universe and nature. I don't see how there could be feedback loops within a 'modeled' system to discern what new human requirements are not being met. I am not trying to be critical, just to understand. Thanx.
        • thumb
          May 30 2012: I read your reply, but I dont really understand how you came to that conclusion, especially since I see the exact opposite, can you explain your reasoning in a different way?

          The existing financial systems of the world are extremely flawed...

          Currency ONLY states its face value; it doesnt care where or how you got it, and this makes theft possible, unfairness possible, & all sorts of things possible ...but I could not list all the flaws of currency here in this forum, that is an article of its own.

          So far as feedback loops in modelling is concerned, that is actually quite easy, and the problems you raise are no where near as big as you may imagine them to be. but I cannot explain it to you without first giving you a lesson in maths & science, and even then it would be a lot easier done face to face so i can draw you pictures.

          Could I ask you to accept that some things you will not understand in this discussion?

          I think you are interpreting a lot of things in entirely the wrong way, and far from being obsolete on installation, this system would create a company very difficult for others to compete with if they were in the exact same industry producing the same or similar products & services - and there are a whole host of reasons for that.

          Besides all of this, the comparison between what I am proposing & the existing economic systems of the world, really comes down to this:

          1 - the existing systems have already failed in delivering sustainability & friendliness to both society & the environment, they are absolutely undeniably destructive & unsustainable, all evidence shows this conclusively & irrefutably.

          2 - as the world's population grows, and the earth's already taxed ability to replenish itself shrinks further, doing nothing is not an option.

          3 - the existing system is incapable of being part of the solution, because of its flaws... either it has to be redesigned from scratch, or replaced by something without flaws.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.