thomas torpey

Someone is shy

Thomas hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
Actually, What Gail is describing (somewhat "drippingly?") is very true. Our socio-evolutionary past stems from a root of tribal, dominant-mail, top-down paradigm. That is natural. Our salvation is that the new models are founded on a conceptual and technological basis that is highly profitable. 50 years ago starting a major technological company in a garage was far more difficult. Now we have Kickstarter and other "Social Capital" systems that are incubating new companies, technologies and models like a greenhouse. We will either evolve or fail, period.
Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
Believe it or not, after considering what such an approach to economics might be called, and settling on "Quantum Economics," I discovered the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_economics. Apparently this was outlined in the 1950's. And here I thought the name was a little goofy...Well, at least I can say I'm not alone in my wacky notions...thank you all!
Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
I have been unable to respond due to personal issues. First, I am not concerned with the reputation or legality of Rockefeller. The United States of America passed the Sherman Anti-trust act to prevent corporations replacing the government as the primary source of political power. In pursuit of the original idea and the discussion of it I would like to propose a few observations. 1) Money is energy. money is a unit of exchange, and so is a photon. Mass and Energy are inextricability linked in physics. logically there would be a similar relationship between money and property. The problem comes in (IMHO) when we consider that very little of the "money" in the world is backed by a direct property relationship. If we analyse the structure of value creation it starts with labor. This is the famous adage "Time is Money!" It is indeed. What, if anything would be the E=MC2 of economics? What is the real value of a unit of currency? 2)Gravity. The force of attraction (or repulsion) that exists between two blocks of captial. What would be the economic equivilant of the Gravitational constant? 3) Entropy. This must apply to economics but needs to be codified. This would also lead to the laws of thermodynamics I use a term "capital velocity." I use it to relate to the number of times that a unit of currency (value not actual printed cash) changes hands in a given time frame. I believe that this is an important consideration. Much of my ruminations center around a connection between micro and macro economics and building a basis for a new understanding of a socio-economic system that can help define the future of our world, not justify its past. Again Thank you!
Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
No! not a culprit! a man of his times, not ours. I speak only of the nature of economics at a time in U.S. history when the twentyth century was forming. As to the relative "moral" or "ethical" nature of anything, I am a very firm Cultural Relativist. If you say its unethical then it is, for you. I do not question or raise issue with this. In the U.S. corporate espionage is a crime, under certain circumstances as is price fixing. However, I will see what I can find on those references you requested. Shall I message you directly with the information or just post a reference here?
Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
Ah! I was unaware that you are familiar with the work of Mises. I understand a little better your "angle of view." I have great respect for the work of great minds, like Ludwig Von Mises. There were recorded incidents of actual violence against teamsters (the horse "team" drivers, the origin of the modern use of the term in America) as well as competitors that refused to give in. Much of the tactics used would be recognized today as corporate espionage, price fixing and other business practices currently frowned upon. As I mentioned in my two part post, I am hopeful of "staying on point" with regard to the subject of potential new economic theories and mechanisms. Positive or Negative assertions regarding the ethical character of past events is illustrative but not actionable. We are, like it or not facing the formation of a global society. This requires letting go of the past and "he said, she said" and begin a dialog on a potentially better idea. Your knowledge on the subject is well developed and your input very probative as to the nature of what has and hasn't worked and how to view future industry, capital and society.
Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
[response to Krisztián Pintér re: illegal...] As I understand it, in some cases actual coercion was involved but mostly the acts consisted of forcing other companies and individuals to merge with him, sell out to him, or face being run out of business. I regret that the details of the period have left memory but the information is available I'm sure. I do understand that to a degree this is somewhat controversial in nature. The laws did not exist then that do now, the reason for my comment that those methods would be illegal now, not then. However it was largely due to Standard Oil that the Anti-trust laws came into being.
Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
At a critical stage in the development of Standard Oil John D Rockefeller focused on oil transportation from the oil fields to the refineries. At the time much of this was via horse and wagon. The short version of the story is that Standard Oil used what we would consider today, illegal business practices to gain control of that specific segment of the industry. As a result his domination of the nascent oil industry was set. The rest is history. This is my understanding of that phase of Standard Oil's history, If you have correct information please share it with me. I hope that our dialog will continue, its our future, not mine.
Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
Hello Jan-Bernd, the intellectual property issue is a very large and problematic one. Interestingly enough this is, i believe, a method for establishing command control structures for the virtual future. As the human race is in a constant struggle for a stable system there will be counter-forces such a "Copy Left" and "Creative Commons" efforts. That they win or no is not as important as the balance of forces in the conflict. The Intellectual Property laws are regressive and western-centric. Any modernization of the laws (like the modernization of banking law) would naturally result in a move toward a more balanced and sustainable model. Indeed this is a challange, very critical and a very long topic indeed.... Regarding scarcity and resource availablity. Physical resources like food and energy are certainly limited. But, with technology both can be extended vastly, and I believe they will. The challenge is to prevent the "Intellectual Property" and "Gene Trolls" from crippling distribution. This was how Rockefeller took control of the oil industry. Very erudite and insightful comments, thank you!
Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
The connection between money, income and work is the very thing that needs to return. For those in the U.S.; does anybody remember union benefits, good paying jobs with retirement and such? We are less competitive now than then and our standard of living has faded. What I think is needed is the establishment of a direct connection in the form of a time-based currency. In other words; the standard of currency value is the labor rate (NOT income) of human effort. Just as carbon credits become currency the basis of currency can be anything or nothing. Thank you Rhona!
Noface
thomas torpey
Posted over 2 years ago
Gravitational Economics
Part of the problem is perception. Continuous growth can happen as our economic system is transiting to a virtual model with, essentially, virtual products. Add to that the emergent economies, micro-finance, crowd sourced funding and freelance, internet based employment and the bottom up dynamic is in place. The sustainable model (if you count trends that are not of "western origin.") is developing and the understanding is that a more democratic distribution of wealth (resources) is part of that model. As to the "Singularity-Class" technology, considered that 1/3 of the human race has a cell phone. Your pessimism is not only well founded but highly advisable. The future is potential only until manifest. As far as hitting the wall, we have, and it has had an impact. This is why the forces of autocracy are fighting so hard in the U.S. and Europe, they feel they need to. Thank you very much for your thoughts on the matter.