TED Conversations

Trevor Rose

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

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.

+2
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    May 29 2012: One other comment, for those of you who are familiar with the ideas that are being proposed in general that society should be based on a meritocracy, or that our economics should be based on sustainable resource usage, and that there should be social sustainability in the way that the rewards & resources of our activities as a species are distributed.

    THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR PUTTING THAT SYSTEM INTO OPERATION, AND THE BASIC PREMISES REQUIRED TO MAKE IT WORK HAVE ALL BEEN DETERMINED... IT JUST NEEDS FUNDING & RESOURCES TO GET IT STARTED.

    Part of the business strategy around it is a plan for its exponential growth, because every person who gets involved has the maximum possibility of advancing their own projects.

    ...yes, I am quite serious about this... it is literally ready to go, and once started, will evolve & grow while simultaneously creating projects in every imaginable realm of endeavour, which are all based on creating a more friendly, sustainable, and exciting world.

    I posted this conversation in the TED forums in the hope that people with resources & connections who are serious about this change taking place, can come forward & put their money where their mouth is, rather than everyone spending the next 5 - 10 years debating how to do it.
    • thumb
      May 31 2012: Deal me out it is a bad idea.
      • thumb
        May 31 2012: i am not biting on that Pat... you dont know anywhere near enough to make that judgement call... having asked exactly zero questions... I cant say I respect your opinion, as I dont have any information with which to offer it that, I do respect your right to express it though.
        • thumb
          May 31 2012: You have the audacity to disrespect my opinion here on TED, all I have to say is get in line.

          Re proposal and my lack of understanding I might suprise you.

          The very definition of money is an symbol backed by confidence. This is the reason it is often backed by gold or something valuable. This is one thing about your proposal that is ambigous which means I don't have any confidence in your proposal.

          You appear to have the notion that the economy is a zero sum game, this is patently not true, the pie grows.

          You appear to have the notion that you know best or that world's affairs should can be regulated again this is patently untrue. One day in the economy contain's hundreds billions of decesions made by individuals following their own best interest which connect all 7 billion of us every day through these transactioins. This is natural law that only works when it is left alone. When it meddled with it inevitably ends up in failure and suffering.

          The very definition of economics is the study of scarce resources that have alternative uses. This means that todays scarcities are tommorows plenties if the free market is allowed to work it's magic. E.g. energy todays scarcity in oil will result in a more plentiful energy source tommorow as the price rises someone will come up with a better solution unless someone is allowed to meddle with or regulate natural law out of it.
      • thumb
        May 31 2012: do you understand what the proposal is? where to find it?
        • thumb
          May 31 2012: AND Pat, since you have blocked me from replying to you directly, I have to reply to you via Kris... and I think that is without doubt quite cowardly of you, which is not name calling TED, it is an OBSERVATION based on evidence he provided himself.

          Economics IS NOT the study of scarce resources that have alternative uses yaddah yaddah yaddah... economics is the study of the effect of MONEY on & from other things (including the scarce resources you mentioned)... what you said is what economists THINK economics is a study of, because they dont understand real science, and because they think that their comprehension of basic arithmetic & their use of it in counting how much money they made & how they made it, constitutes a science... it is a joke of a science, and every other scientist (and especially the mathematicians) know this.

          Did you know that economics has to hire real mathematicians to do their maths for them, because the economists cant DO that level of maths for themselves in the first place?

          Did you know that none of those real mathematicians, nor any other real scientist has ever been involved in developing any of the underlying core principles of economics? ...and so any maths they do, is only counting the numbers of a fundamentally flawed system?

          ...of course you dont Pat, you believe in it as religiously as a person of faith does believe in their own particular sect or cult.
      • thumb
        May 31 2012: No Pat, everything you said was assumption about what you think it is I believe, and you are utterly wrong, and I cannot even see where you drew that conclusion from... you certainly havent shown it.

        Krisztian - have you ever opened your eyes & noticed how TED has a severe character limit & no ability to embed anything? ...did it ever occur to you that for me to explain completely such a complex system in text alone in this minimal space would be an impossibility, and what I was hoping via this supposedly intellectual forum is that I would encounter something other than trolls who do nothing more than look for something to criticize & then do so without bothering to look for anything other than ammunition to criticize with?

        Both you & Pat have patently failed to be polite, patently failed to take the slightest interest in asking real questions, and patently failed to see the substance of what i have written and thereby determine what sensible questions you could have asked... and I dont know if your comments pass as clever in your own circles, but they certainly do not do so in mine... i do not know anyone who would be anything other than utterly embarrassed to post what you both have... and it says way more about yourselves than anything else.

        ...and finally TED > I came to this forum in good faith posting a concept which has been worked on for many years by myself and another guy who is an EXPERT in the field of ecological systems modelling, and whom has completed his MASTERS in instrumentation engineering, along with several other post grad degrees at RMIT in Melbourne Australia.... and not only do you ALLOW these people to harass without reason rationality or evidence, but if I am remotely impolite in my responses to their un-researched & un-educated abusiveness, you censor me??

        TED, you are either going to rectify this AND publicly post a major apology about all this, OR I am going to publicly post not only a record of this discussion, but your censorship
        • thumb
          May 31 2012: Trevor I resent your statement I'm patently not clever.

          If my assumptions are wrong enlighten me. I have studied this subject more than a little.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.