- Ronald Vallecer
- Hong Kong
- Hong Kong
This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
That perspective margins is a better measure of wealth than current monetary based systems
Perspective margins is that which makes one feel poor either by comparison, satiation of reward appreciation or lack of appreciation. Though it is hard to put a number to it, perspective margins is hinged on an emotional response so strong that it takes very little training to verbally report. And unlike money which is a zero sum based unit of wealth, often making it hard or sometimes impossible to acquire in satisying quantities, Pmargins is all about universal empowerment, the idea that one can affect inter and external socio infrastructure framework to regulate Pmargins.
Pmargins have existed a lot longer than money has, in fact money works under the premise of Pmargins. Time is up!!













Ronald Vallecer
Everything in life that man can experience can be broken down into contrasts. The innate ability to make connections between past and present, to make future predictions all stem from something that a lot of us take for granted, consciousness. Consciousness allows us to reflect on intention and premeditate action, it allows one to state fact or opinion, experience essence or the absence of it.
Though countless artefacts have been uncovered giving us minute glimpses into the minds of our past ancestors, one can never know for sure really, what had happened had happened and as is always with experience, can never truly be be fathomed completely. On the bright side though, what we lack in documentation we can make up through imagination, as it truly matters, at the end of the day, everything is a personal experience.
I can imagine the earliest of us, just as I can imagine what a cat is thinking, or a dog, or beings of species that we consider "like us", memory, surely they had consciousness, five senses driven by the most basic need of anything, survival. We are social species, even before we knew of the concept. Through nature and nurture, the cycle of culture was passed on through social and some would argue biological means. But just as we do even today, the ability to be conscious of consciousness was not always with us. Any of us upon reflection notice that our memory of our past stops a long way from birth. Babies cry, smile, crawl, stand, walk and talk, and then a couple of years later begin to report consciousness. For more.. visit http://perspectivemargins.blogspot.hk/2012/12/pmargins-made-our-world-go-round.html
John Smith 30+
Ronald Vallecer
Krisztián Pintér 200+
"I believe you understand my point"
surely, and i agree. just added a note.
"that many people dismiss the idea of actually studying it because of some convenient misconception"
indeed. we are on the same page here. however, if someone finally decides to study the physics proper, he can know where to go. but if someone decides to study economics, he will face the rather troublesome situation that even professionals disagree in basic things, and there are alternative schools making just as much or more sense. and also, one needs to be blind not to see that physics works. 800m high buildings, space ships, x-ray and mri devices all do what they supposed to do. however any successful application of economics is yet to be seen. on the contrary, we see widely accepted theories fall flat on their face all the time.
so i'm not saying that disregarding theory is a good thing. but i understand where they are coming from.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
A difficult idea to convey, often, is the idea that models in a discipline can be useful even if they do omit some features of a complex situation.
I see some fields many people believe they understand long before, or much better than they do. Economics is one. You have seen how many people are utterly persuaded by such economics as is put forward in the Zeitgeist movie.
While people tend to accept that they know little mathematics, a -to me- surprising number of people accept themselves as educated in physics or in educational systems and pedagogies.
But the study of economics is often summarily dismissed or substituted with reading/accepting popular material that stands on a foundation of a few toothpicks.
Krisztián Pintér 200+
http://xkcd.com/451/
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Barry Palmer 50+
My ignorance of economics is enormous, but in the one class I took it was pointed out on day one that economics is about values, not money.
Many people posting on TED seem to think that our economic system is "monetary based" and that seems completely wrong to me. Would this analogy make sense?: If our economy is based on money, then mammals are based on blood. What are your thoughts?
Fritzie Reisner 100+
I don't think your analogy quite works. Mammals all have blood, and yet there have been exchange economies that have not used money in the sense in which we mean it today. Money is a means of streamlining and reducing the cost of transactions involved in exchange. Transactions involving exchange are the fundamental economic idea, with such exchanges driven by value in the sense of benefit/utility.
Ronald Vallecer
I work in a school were countless tangibles go unnoticed but are valued nonetheless. The Pmargin values are super high for students, teachers and parents alike, but I am one to notice that although the Pmargin values are apparent, the design in which it is sustained isn't. We don't learn, live and socialise to make money, everybody knows this, some people are good at making money, but why is it that they should have the most influence of all, when a lot of the rich have very poor Pmargins value. Next up, tomorrow when I wake up maybe, the role of culture and biology in Pmargins.
Comment deleted
Ronald Vallecer
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
I believe you understand my point, as you have studied economics. In any field, there is material grounded in basic understanding that a person in that discipline or out might come to reject. Indeed that is how theories can be modified in a discipline over time.(The same is true in a science). What may not be entirely peculiar to economics but is conspicuous to it is that many people dismiss the idea of actually studying it because of some convenient misconception about what sorts of ideas they believe economics cannot address. For example we have the concept of "utility" you raised in reply to Roald. Many people assume that economics concerns itself only with money and assumes no one values anything else. Because people, in fact, value other things, this misconception about economic models causes some people to decide the whole discipline is useless in understanding human behavior and therefore not worthy of understanding.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Ronald Vallecer
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
and at this point, opinions diverge
Ronald Vallecer
Krisztián Pintér 200+
but i don't exactly understand how would that change our views or policies.
Krisztián Pintér 200+
george lockwood 30+
Ronald Vallecer