And Then You Crash - Meconomics

This blogpost is a continuation to:
Reality in a Bubble – Meconomics
Inflating Reality Much? – Meconomics
Do You Know the Stakes of the Bets you Place? – Meconomics
Have you Ever been Swept Off your Feet?

In this little series, we’ve been investigating the phenomenon of inflation, how we in our daily lives participate in ‘inflating our reality’ and so, how we are on a personal level participating in the same principles/dynamics that we see playing out on a bigger scale when it comes to inflation, speculative bubbles and financial market crashes.

We saw that there is actually a set process involved that we can roughly break down into three stages:

1.    the start/onset,
2.    the process of inflation,
3.    the popping of the bubble.

We discussed stages 1 and 2 in the previous posts, so let’s look more closely at:

3. The Popping of the Bubble

The popping of the bubble is usually a singular moment that can be experienced as a ‘crash’ or an ‘explosion’ – though the consequences of the entire process (stages 1, 2 and 3) can linger and last for quite a while as the domino-blocks start falling.

The popping of the bubble is in essence the sudden release of all the energy that had been accumulating and growing in the process of inflation. Energy cannot ‘keep on accumulating forever’ – it has a breaking-point – and that is the point where the bubble pops and we experience some form of a crash, explosion or release.

Looking at the example of the couple fighting, where the on-set was one person forgetting to buy toothpaste, the popping of the bubble would be the moment where a snap decision is made at the culmination point within the fight of: ending the relationship. This is of course an extreme example, where we illustrated the process of inflation over a very short period of time, but actually, you would be surprised how often such decisions are made not because of practical common sense considerations, but because of an energy that had been growing and accumulating to the point where it seems like ‘the only choice’ to make in a moment.

We also saw in the previous post that inflation can occur both with negative and positive energy. Remember the example of the teenage girls ‘screeching’ in excitement? Well, I used to be one of those – and let me tell you – I would experience quite a ‘crash’ afterwards – not necessarily in terms of a ‘fight’ or a ‘break up’ type of experience, but I would get absolutely exhausted and experience huge headaches after a day out with my girlfriends. Another example would be when you fill your ‘inflation bubble’ with ‘high hopes and expectations’ – where you can easily crash into a sudden experience of total disappointment and despondence.

The moment the bubble is popped – the energy releases and all that we are left with is the physical reality. The abrupt transition from being emerged within energy where everything you see, think, feel and do is influenced by whatever energy you are experiencing, be it positive or negative – can create quite a ‘shock’ as you are suddenly faced with ‘what is left’ – which is your reality. That’s how we often have those moments of looking back at something we did or said and regret it or wonder why and how we could have done or said what we did/said in past moments. Because when looking back at the event without being emerged in the energy – you can see alternative courses of actions and behaviors.

So – with the example of the couple breaking up – you might have experienced similar moments where you are suddenly ‘snapped back’ to reality and all of a sudden everything has changed and you don’t even clearly see or understand how it could have ‘come to that’. This is the immediate experience after the popping of the bubble, but at the same time it is the on-set of a series of consequences. Because no matter how you wish you could ‘take things back’ – you can’t – it is done, things were said and done and there is no way to ignore the new reality that you suddenly created for yourself.

Understand then – that when you experience a ‘crash’ – it’s not something that ‘just happened’ or ‘happened to you’, you actually created it over a period of time through your own participation in reactions and mental energy. So, then you can have a look: where did I make an interpretation/react to something that was said/done or that happened in my physical reality? Where/when/how did I keep adding energy, inflating a bubble and removing myself more and more from physical reality? What kinds of energy did I fill this bubble with? Now that you have an overview of the process that ‘leads to’ such a crash, you can trace back your steps and learn from the past.

Read More

Have you Ever been Swept Off Your Feet? - Meconomics

This blogpost is a continuation to:
Reality in a Bubble – Meconomics
Inflating Reality Much? – Meconomics
Do You Know the Stakes of the Bets you Place? – Meconomics







In the previous blog we started looking at the different stages we move through when we inflate things in our reality:

1.    the start/onset,
2.    the process of inflation,
3.    the popping of the bubble.

We ended off our discussion of the start/onset of the inflation bubble with the following:

“You have to remember, we’re slowing things down here – in those moments, it all happens in a blink of an eye. You ask your partner about the toothpaste – he says he forgot – and next thing you’re already saying ‘Gee, you’re such an ass!!’. Everything that we looked at here, happens in that tiny fraction of a moment between hearing he forgot the toothpaste and speaking to him in response. Because it all moves so fast, we often don’t realize how it is in those fractions of moments that we’re actually busy creating/starting an inflation bubble. Yet, it’s in those fractions of moments that the first point of responsibility lies: you interpreted, you chose, you made a bet – and went forward with it.

What do I mean with ‘and went forward with it’. Once you’ve interpreted your partner’s forgetfulness as meaning that ‘he’s an ass’ – then that is how you see him, how you will speak to him, how you will approach him. In other words – you’re actually no longer speaking to your partner as the person standing in front of you, you’re speaking to your own interpretation of who you perceive your partner to be. This is the moment where you’re creating a shift/rift in your reality – from remaining grounded in the physical reality – to entering a ‘bubble’.”

So, let’s move on to the next stage:

2. The Process of Inflation

The process of inflation is that section of the event where things just escalate more and more and kind of start getting out of hand. The start/onset was merely, you acting on the interpretation of what a person did. In the example we used, the start/onset was exemplified by the saying of the words ‘Gee, you’re such an ass’.

Now – any person can see that these words (Gee, you’re such an ass) are not ‘neutral words’, they are charged words. Words are charged when we speak them with a particular energy. We charge our words positively when we speak words with for instance love or hope, (eg: I know you can do this, honey!) and we charge words negatively when we speak words with for instance anger, annoyance or frustration (eg: how many times must I tell you this!).

These energetic charges are key to understanding the process of inflation, because generally speaking, something interesting happens when we speak words that are energetically charged. You can see it for yourself by looking at any memories where a person spoke to you and their words were energetically charged: how did you feel? You might not be able to name the exact experience you had, but you definitely felt ‘something’. That ‘something’ is your energetic reaction to another’s words.

So – when we speak within energy and our words are charged – the person we are speaking to is more than likely going to now have their own energetic reaction to that. If they then speak in that moment while they are having this energy moving inside themselves, their words will also be energetically charged. What happens then? Well now, we are going to react again upon hearing these energetically charged words. Are you starting to see how this works? You get a back-and-forth argument as every time a person speaks, the other reacts and ‘wants to say something back’. As this back-and-forth argument continues, what happens inside each person? Each one’s energy levels are increasing and more and more the energetic experience becomes the driving force in each one’s words and actions. In other words – the argument gets more and more emotional and less and less rational.

Dependent on whether the initial charge of the words were positive or negative, you will start creating a bubble between you and the person you’re speaking with that is either filled with positive energy or with negative energy.

When the initial charge of the words spoken was negative, then the other person is likely to respond with a negative energy/experience and their words will also be negatively charged. That is the case in the example we’re working with. The initial words spoken (let’s say by person A) were “Gee, you’re such an ass”, which are words that are negatively charged. The other person (call it person B) will react negatively in return, and their words will also be negatively charged. The negative energy that person A is receiving from person B is now intensifying and supporting person A’s original negative experience, and so it gets bigger. Each time person A or person B speaks with negative energy, they are in essence ‘feeding’ the negative energy within the other. So, both are now being swept up in a cycle of negativity that builds and get bigger. That is the bubble that is being inflated. Inflated with what? With negative energy.

The same dynamic can take place with positive energy. If a person speaks while experiencing positive energy like excitement, their words will be positively charged and the person they are speaking to will probably experience a positive experience in return (this is what is referred to in sayings like ‘her enthusiasm is rubbing off on me’). In the same way, this can lead to a back-and-forth conversation where the positive energy just builds and builds more and more. Have you ever heard teenage girls screeching and shouting with high-pitched voices in absolute excitement – well, this is how they ‘get to’ that state. The only difference is that the bubble they created was inflated with positive energy.

In both cases – whether the bubble was inflated with positive or negative energy – the participants in the bubble are being swept away further and further away from actual physical reality and start to see everything either ‘extremely negatively’ or ‘extremely positively’ – neither experience is grounded in reality – because the physical is neither positive or negative – it just is what it is.

Read More

Do You Know the Stakes of the Bets you Place? - Meconomics

This blogpost is a continuation to:

Reality in a Bubble – Meconomics
Inflating Reality Much? – Meconomics

Read the previous posts for context.




I ended off my previous post with the following:

“When we start reacting inside ourselves (in the experiential reality/dimension) to what we hear/see in our physical reality, we change the way we perceive reality. If your partner forgot to buy toothpaste, then in physical reality, this means: your partner forgot to buy toothpaste. (Okay, that may sound silly, but it’s actually so silly that most of us don’t recognize how complicated we make our lives.) In your experiential reality, if your partner forgot to buy toothpaste, it can mean: “My partner doesn’t care about me”; “My partner is unreliable”; “I have to think of everything in this relationship”, “I do so much for him/her and he/she can’t even do this one little thing for me”.

So – we have this nasty habit of inflating something that happens in our physical reality through interpreting it and reacting to it in our experiential reality – making it seem bigger than it actually is. I’m sure you can relate to such moments, they occur so often that we have come to accept them as ‘normal’ – but let’s continue looking at them a bit further so we can really grasp and understand what it is we’re doing in such moments and how it creates a direct line of responsibility from ourselves to the phenomenon of speculative bubbles and the consequences they create in people’s lives.”

We can identify three stages when it comes to inflating things in our reality:
1.    the start/onset,
2.    the process of inflation,
3.    the popping of the bubble.

Let’s look at each of these stages in turn so we can really go into the nitty-gritty of how this works, what we participate in, how we actually create these bubbles. When it comes to meconomics – the better we understand ourselves, how these things work in our own personal lives on a small scale, the more empowered we are to understand and change how the same is manifested on a large scale in the economy.


1.    The Start/Onset of Inflation Bubbles in our Lives

We’ve looked at how we’re working with two realities or dimensions of reality – the physical reality and the experiential reality. We saw how, when something happens in our physical reality, that we pick up with our physical senses, we often INTERPRET these events to have a particular ‘meaning’. So – you’ve got your physical reality, you’ve got your physical senses like hearing, touch, smell, etc with which you take in information of what happens around you – but then – you also have an inner experiential reality through which the information is ‘filtered’ and where you add additional meaning and interpretations to what happens in your physical reality.

So, if we take the fictional example of your partner forgetting to buy toothpaste – what you pick up through your physical senses is just that: your partner forgot to buy toothpaste. But now – that information gets filtered through your inner experiential reality, which can be for instance all the memories of when he forgot to do something, or all the memories where you went out of your way to do something for him when he asked you to – and then together with that – all the experiences, emotions, feelings you’ve had in those previous memories. So – even though the information that is ‘coming in’ from your environment is: “your partner forgot to buy toothpaste” – what you end up experiencing and perceiving can be “he’s such an ass”.

(Little side-note: I’m here using the viewpoint of a female and the partner who forgot to buy the toothpaste as being a male to cut down on having to write him/her – but obviously, you can switch the roles and genders around, it goes both ways. So, if you’re a guy reading this, then just imagine the partner being a woman who forgot to buy toothpaste and the eventual experience being “she’s such a bitch”.)

What is interesting about this, is that it is actually a form of speculating. What is speculating? It is to “form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence.” In this example, the conclusion or theory is that ‘your partner is an ass’ and that’s why he forgot to buy tooth paste. You don’t have any firm evidence, because you’re just using your own memories and experiences as a reference and assuming that they provide you with solid proof, but they don’t really. In terms of what happened ‘right now’, in that ‘that’ moment – all you’ve got is that your partner forgot to buy toothpaste, everything else that you think about it or feel about it, is based on speculation.

When it comes to speculating in the financial market, the same happens – you’re looking at different indicators and factors, what direction things seem to be moving in – from that you make assumptions about what will happen in the future and from there, you make your investment decisions. You have no certainty beforehand, you’re only interpreting data and trying to derive ‘meaning’ from it and then trying to project this meaning in the future to see where you would best invest. Speculation in the financial market is an investment with the hope of gain, but with a risk of loss – wherein your decision-making is based on assumptions/conjectures/guesses. In other words: you’re placing a bet, you’re gambling.

If we bring this back to our personal lives where we interpret what happens in our physical reality by filtering it through our inner experiential reality, we’re actually placing a bet as well. It is a choice, for instance, to believe your perception and interpretation that ‘your partner is an ass’ to be true – you’re betting on it being true. And what are you placing in the balance? The future of your relationship.

You have to remember, we’re slowing things down here – in those moments, it all happens in a blink of an eye. You ask your partner about the toothpaste – he says he forgot – and next thing you’re already saying ‘Gee, you’re such an ass!!’. Everything that we looked at here, happens in that tiny fraction of a moment between hearing he forgot the toothpaste and speaking to him in response. Because it all moves so fast, we often don’t realize how it is in those fractions of moments that we’re actually busy creating/starting an inflation bubble. Yet, it’s in those fractions of moments that the first point of responsibility lies: you interpreted, you chose, you made a bet – and went forward with it.

What do I mean with ‘and went forward with it’. Once you’ve interpreted your partner’s forgetfulness as meaning that ‘he’s an ass’ – then that is how you see him, how you will speak to him, how you will approach him. In other words – you’re actually no longer speaking to your partner as the person standing in front of you, you’re speaking to your own interpretation of who you perceive your partner to be. This is the moment where you’re creating a shift/rift in your reality – from remaining grounded in the physical reality – to entering a ‘bubble’.

Read More

Inflating Reality Much? - Meconomics

This post is a continuation to:

Reality in a Bubble – Meconomics

In my previous post we discussed speculative bubbles in the economy, where we saw how prices of assets increase through a process of speculation over and above the ‘real prices’ (which would reflect their actual value). We say the prices are ‘inflated’ (just like how you inflate a balloon or bubble) – and we looked at some of the major damage that those speculative bubbles can create, especially after they pop, where we looked at the example of the Greek economy.

How are Speculative Bubbles in the economy a reflection of bubbles we create in our personal lives?

Maybe let’s start with the following question: have you ever had an argument with a friend, family member or partner where the initial point of disagreement or the initial issue is blown entirely out of proportion? A conversation with your partner can start, for instance, with ‘did you remember to buy us toothpaste?’ and end up in a full-blown fight with shouting and tears. And then when you calm down, you realize you just broke up with your partner – you can’t remember how the fight started but suddenly your life looks very different. How does that happen? How do we do that?

We do it through a process of inflation – have a look, I twice used some form of the word ‘blowing’ in the above paragraph: blowing something out of proportion and full-blown fight – we blow bubbles and then they pop. Why is it inflation? Because there is no way someone is going to break up with their partner over forgetting to buy toothpaste – obviously something happened between the asking of that question and breaking up…

What we’re looking at is two ‘dimensions’ – you have the first dimension which is the ‘physical reality’, the actual events that take place or the reality we all have in common, and you have the ‘experiential reality’, which is how you interpret things that happen in your reality, how you become upset or sad over something, everything that you experience, that ‘takes place’ on an energetic level inside your own mind and body. I put the words ‘takes place’ in those little quotation marks, because the very nature of everything that happens in your ‘experiential reality’ is that it doesn’t really take up space – it’s not physical, you can’t touch it. We generate those experiences inside ourselves in moments, but they are not constant or stable.

When we start reacting inside ourselves (in the experiential reality/dimension) to what we hear/see in our physical reality, we change the way we perceive reality. If your partner forgot to buy toothpaste, then in physical reality, this means: your partner forgot to buy toothpaste. (Okay, that may sound silly, but it’s actually so silly that most of us don’t recognize how complicated we make our lives.) In your experiential reality, if your partner forgot to buy toothpaste, it can mean: “My partner doesn’t care about me”; “My partner is unreliable”; “I have to think of everything in this relationship”, “I do so much for him/her and he/she can’t even do this one little thing for me”.

So – we have this nasty habit of inflating something that happens in our physical reality through interpreting it and reacting to it in our experiential reality – making it seem bigger than it actually is. I’m sure you can relate to such moments, they occur so often that we have come to accept them as ‘normal’ – but let’s continue looking at them a bit further so we can really grasp and understand what it is we’re doing in such moments and how it creates a direct line of responsibility from ourselves to the phenomenon of speculative bubbles and the consequences they create in people’s lives.

Read More

Reality in a Bubble - Meconomics

Here’s a fun topic to explore – BUBBLES!!!

What do you know about blowing bubbles?
1. It’s fun
2. You blow air unto a film of soapy liquid and it starts creating a bubble
3. The more air you blow into it, the bigger the bubble becomes
3. Blow in too much air – and the bubble pops.

Bubbles exist in economics as well – they’re called ‘Speculative Bubbles’.

Here’s a definition from Investopedia (don’t worry if you don’t understand everything):

“A spike in asset values within a particular industry, commodity, or asset class.

A speculative bubble is usually caused by exaggerated expectations of future growth, price appreciation, or other events that could cause an increase in asset values. This drives trading volumes higher, and as more investors rally around the heightened expectation, buyers outnumber sellers, pushing prices beyond what an objective analysis of intrinsic value would suggest.

The bubble is not completed until prices fall back down to normalized levels; this usually involves a period of steep decline in price during which most investors panic and sell out of their investments.”
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/speculativebubble.asp#ixzz3dmyCNpUB

In the simplest terms, what is said here is: Air is put into a bubble and then the bubble bursts. What happens, is that the value of assets is inflated beyond their real value. So – you have an asset, say a house – that has a particular intrinsic value – say 3 million dollars. Through speculation, the price of the house is driven up, for instance from 3 million to 5 million dollars – but the actual value of the house doesn’t change – it’s still only actually worth 3 million dollars. The 2 million that gets added on top is just air – and the bubble bursts when the price decreases at a fast pace from 5 back to 3 million.

You can imagine how these bubbles can create economic disasters – because in the end, economics is about sustaining lives. When you don’t know whether the ground you’re walking on is real or could collapse any moment, you’re working with instability and uncertainty, which at the moment are two words that are embedded in our economic system, partly due to the nature of these speculative bubbles.

To give you an idea of the far-reaching consequences these bubbles can have, just think of the recent financial crisis. Greece was herein the unfortunate ‘posterchild’.  On the 17th of June the Debt Truth Commission, set up to investigate the truth about the Greek debt, presented their preliminary findings to parliament. I suggest you read through the entire article (http://cadtm.org/Summary-of-the-first-day-of-the), but for the purpose of this post, specifically read the following paragraph:

“The scientific coordinator recounted the history of the Greek debt in a way that has not been done by the mainstream medias during the last five years: “We realised that the usual explanations of a disastrous state of public finances were not confirmed”; he said. A strict analysis of the facts and the figures has allowed the commission to look at past events differently. As from the moment that Greece entered the Eurozone private capital rushed into Greece where it earned high yields. Wherever capital converges speculative bubbles are created! We have the figures that prove this happened: between 2001 and 2009 household loans increased sevenfold and small business loans increased fourfold, while State loans only increased by 20%. At end of the 2000s the finances that were suffering were heavily indebted private finances not State finances.”
http://cadtm.org/Summary-of-the-first-day-of-the

Speculative bubbles were right at the center of the on-set of economic instability in Greece – this instability rapidly escalating and spiraling out into these disastrous consequences:

“• –– Vicious circle of recession.The continuous drop in GDP, in 2011 surpassing the historical maximum for the entire postwar period, led to a rapid reduction in domestic demand. Lower production led to dismissals and the loss of thousands of jobs, further amplifying recession.

• –– Unemployment had already more than doubled within the first three years of austerity and reached 25.4 percent in August 2012. More than half of the population between 15–24 years old is unemployed (57 percent; Eurostat 2012), while thousands of jobs have been lost under conditions of insufficient social protection. Given the continuation of the crisis, the new unemployed become the chronic unemployed.

• –– Rapid labor deterioration, as shown by the increase of precarious and uninsured work, insecurity, degrading payments, weakening of labour rights, and deregulation of labour agreements.

• –– Strangling of the lower middle class, traditionally consisting of small and medium sized enterprises. A great number of such enterprises (family-owned or not) were unable to survive declining consumption, lack of liquidity, and emergency taxes. More than 65,000 of them closed down in 2010 alone, resulting in a “clearance” of such enterprises and disaffecting the people dependent on them.

• –– Migration of younger, highly educated people has risen (“brain drain”), while those studying and living abroad are discouraged to return to Greece, and those who previously would have stayed, are now leaving.

• –– Homelessness increased by 25 percent from 2009 to 2011. Along with the pre-crisis and “hidden” immigrant homelessness, a generation of “neohomeless” now exists who include those with medium or higher educational backgrounds who previously belonged to the social middle.

• –– Suicides hit record levels, increasing by 25 percent from 2009 to 2010 and by an additional 40 percent from 2010 to 2011.

• –– Deterioration of public health evidenced by reduced access to health care services and an increase of 52 percent in HIV infections from 2010 to 2011. Drug prevention centers and psychiatric clinics have closed down due to budget cuts.

To this, one could also add a worrying political impact – that a country with a traditionally weak far right now has one of the largest organised Neo-nazi movements in Europe. In the 2015 legislative elections the ‘Golden Dawn’ secured third place in the popular vote.”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-greek-economic-crisis-the-social-impacts-of-austerity-debunking-the-myths/5431010

So – perhaps economic bubbles are not as fun as the bubbles you blow as a child. But what about the bubbles we blow in our daily lives – what do economic bubbles have to show us about the human condition? That’s what I’ll explore in posts to come. After all – the economic system is a human creation – created in our image and likeness.

Read More

Common Concerns about the Implementation of a Living Income Guaranteed

The following is a Q&A discussion from the Living Income Guaranteed Facebook page.

Do we have equal education, ambition, and iq? should the cashier and server make the same as the entrepreneur with more risk and skin in the game? If you want more pay, find a profession in high demand. Also, if positioning the government to raise minimum wage rates only creates a market distortion inducing hyperinflation, increasing the rate of automated points of sales, job elimination, and pricing some smaller companies completely out of markets. i find it hard to believe that the people on this page can't see through a socialist ideology for the disaster that it is.

Hi - it's not within the Living Income Guaranteed proposal to give each one equal wages, regardless of skill, profession or education. However, it is within the Human Rights Declaration to provide each one with certain rights - which requires a minimum living income. Wouldn't you say it is hypocritical to promise or guarantee these rights and then refrain from providing the means through which these rights find their expression - which in our world, is money? In terms of the inflation argument - please check out the hangout we did on that topic:

A living income is not a right. It's a right to persue, it. How can someone be provided something equal, or to a hyper -standard of their personal production? If a living is "guaranteed ", what is the motivation of the indevidual to continue to be a productive member of society? Where is this guarantee coming from, if the incentive to work is gone? Will farmers farm if they are guaranteed a living even if they dount? Will truckers get up at 3am and drive? Will doctors continue to practice?
The truth is, this utopian, society you are promoting sounds like roses and rainbows but the facts are, you are pushing the same socialist ideology that has been failing for hundreds of years.
I hope you never see the day your agenda is a reality. I hope you never have to explain why you have to stand in line for the only meal of the day. I think you should be studying the reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union, or for that matter, Rome. Noone can guarantee you a living, it's a fact. The people who say they they can, are only going to make those promises until they realize, that giving you that guarantee, means taking from someone else who WORKS for it. It's called slavery. What some see as greed and unfair, I call success.
Asking your government to guarantee your living, is in turn relinquishing your liberty to them. If you want to know your rights, read the constitution. There are no guarantees in life. If you want freedom and peace, and your rights? You have to work and fight for them. And that means taking personal responsibility for your actions and wellbeeing. If you want someone to guarantee you the the things that sustain your life and you are over the age of 18, you are completely delusional.

Hi - I hear your concerns regarding the Living Income Guaranteed proposal as they have been brought up before. If we lived in a world where jobs and opportunities for success were readily available to all - then, yes, we can suppose that it is ever person's choice to live in poverty and there might be reason to leave someone to their own vices. However, that is not the world we live in today. Not everyone grows up in the same environment that supports them with the skills to enter the job-market. Not everyone has access to decent education and even with having a degree and the will to work, youth unemployment is a growing phenomenon, because there are no jobs available. For a different perspective, I suggest you read the blog 'Redemption and the Right to a Living Income' as it is directly pertinent to the point you raised here. Placing that absolute 'rule' or 'principle' that only those who can make a decent living within the economic system rightly deserve it is problematic when you consider the world we live in, because it can not simply be argued that those in poverty choose to be there and/or that they are unwilling to change their living conditions.

In terms of work incentives, we looked at this point as well. If staying at home still provides you with your basic living necessities, would there be a reason to work? One point here I would like to bring up is that pilot projects for a basic income have all shown that work efforts are not reduced when a basic income is provided. So, there is reason to believe that our fears are just that - fears. But do we want to take that risk? We'd rather not. Therefore, within the Living Income Guaranteed proposal, we suggest that the minimum wage be double the Living Income. That means that those with a job can definitely afford more luxurious lifestyles than those living with just the basic requirements - which therefore provides an incentive to take up employment.

In terms of your argument of taking from someone else who worked for their income to provide another with a living income, I suggest you read the Living Income Proposal itself again as we suggest a way of financing the Living Income Guaranteed that does not require means such as income tax which ensures that no one pays for anyone else's Living Income.

That guaranteeing a Living Income stands equal to, or is a slippery slope towards communism is quite a leap. Consider that communism was characterized by central planning and the centralization of ownership of resources. We propose instead that capitalism remains the way in which economic activities are conducted and we support the decentralization of power with minimal government - less government in fact than a welfare state implies. Herein, we agree with Libertarians such as Matt Zwolinski who recently wrote an informative and insightful article titled 'The Pragmatic Libertarian Case for a Basic Income Guarantee'.

The constitutions and the values and principles that we've been upholding are products of the past - where once upon a time, they were considered useful and an improvement over what was here before. However, if you look at the abuse that has been allowed in the name of these values and principles, it becomes clear that we have to formulate new principles for our global society to live by. We simply cannot continue as we are. If not for those in need - then out of self-interest - because in the battle where each person is fighting for their rights - we are disregarding the planet we live on and some day, we will all have to pay the price - unless we change what we're doing. That doesn't mean we have to implement a utopian society of equality - but would it be so outrageous if each person was given the bare necessities to survive?

Read More

Day 257: Living Income Practicality

Q: Will LIG result in the replacement of jobs by machines?

A: The foundation of LIG is to provide the necessary access to the living necessities as a human right, therefore if jobs are replaced by machines as an on-going trend, people will receive the LIG as a means to have their living needs covered. Therefore we don't directly endorse the idea of replacing human labor with machines as that is at this stage decided by each corporation's capacity to implement it in their business. However, also to consider that with LIG, due to financial security, many will feel more confident to start new business ventures, which will again create more jobs.


Q: How do we prevent those receiving LIG from being exploited by greed? For instance: Everyone working is receiving at least double the Living Income. What is to stop the price of goods from moving up so that it's not feasible for people on LIG to afford goods?

A: There will still be short-term fluctuations in the prices of various goods. However, when the prices of the commodities that represent living necessities follow an upward trend to such an extent the Living Income becomes inadequate – the Living Income amount will be increased. If the Living Income goes up, it means the minimum wage – which is defined as double the Living Income – will proportionally increase as well – thus increasing costs for firms. In the long-run it is therefore in firms’ best interest to expand operations in order to meet the increased demand rather than increasing prices. The period where inflation due to an increase in demand is most likely to occur is after the implementation of LIG. It is key, therefore, to ensure that the implementation is done in a transparent way, so that any increase in demand is not unexpected, but firms are prepared for the change and have defined strategies to expand their output.


Q: How will people be motivated to work and perform well under LIG?

A: The classical notion that money is what motivates people to perform well – where the more one earns, the better one performs, has been disproven – for perspective, watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc.
By setting the minimum wage at double the Living Income, every worker is recognized as a vital part of the company, which creates loyalty and a commitment to the goals of the company. It has been shown that when employees receive more than a subsistence income, a firm incurs less turnover costs as well as less costs relating to monitoring the employees. That being said, the relationship between employer and employee is likely to change as LIG increases the bargaining power of employees significantly; no-one will ‘need’ to work anymore. Currently – the threat to lose one’s job is often enough to compromise oneself within one’s job by accepting inferior labor conditions – because one knows that there are always others who will do any job just in order to survive – and thus one is replaceable. With LIG – working is no longer a matter of survival and employers will require to put in the effort to make jobs attractive by creating optimal labor conditions and treating every employee as an individual and not merely as a cog in a machine. The above-referenced video includes several examples of how appealing to employees’ sense of purpose creates far more effective motivation than the threat to lose one’s job.


Q: One point that came up for me is that with the Erasmus program in Europe many students travel to other countries for one year. The student is integrated into the local university system and learns about the culture and the language. In general students' mobility is highly supported by the EU. If there is a country that offers LIG at lower age than most other countries, then that country might see an influx of immigrating youth - would this play a role?

A: Being a student in a country doesn’t make one a citizen, and so, one is not entitled to a Living Income. Countries can specify whether permanent residents would receive LIG, as well as citizens – this could also go in stages, where initially only citizens can claim a Living Income and later, as more countries implement LIG, permanent and perhaps even temporary residents can receive LIG as the inflow of immigrants will not be as intense at that stage.




For context and more information:

Living Income Guaranteed - the Proposal: http://livingincomeguaranteed.wordpress.com/the-proposal/
Living Income Guaranteed YouTube Channel - watch the hangouts: https://www.youtube.com/user/BIGuaranteed?feature=watch
Living Income Guaranteed Website: http://livingincome.me

Read More

Day 244: Transforming Currency into Money with Living Income Guaranteed

In the video "Hidden Secrets Of Money - Ep1 'Currency Vs Money'" Mike Maloney and others present one of the problems we are facing in our current economic system and that is - how the value of our currency is able to change over time - where it can both appreciate and depreciate - but throughout history it has mainly depreciated until it becomes worthless and then a new currency is introduced. The video explains the problem, but it doesn't offer a real solution - which I will be discussing in this blog.

Now - when I said 'the value of our currency is able to change over time' - with 'our currency' I am not referring to a specific currency such as Dollar or Euro or Rand - I am referring to fiat currency. For those who are not aware of the history of our currencies: paper bills were introduced as IOUs - a piece of paper stating that: I owe you 5 gold coins, for instance. Say that you deposited 5 gold coins at the bank. The bank would then write you a claim check that specifies that with that piece of paper, you can at a later time come and claim those 5 gold coins back. Now - over time what started happening, is that when people would go to the market place and wanted to buy something for 7 gold coins, but they only had 2 on them - they would go: "You know, I only have 2 gold coins on me, but I've got 5 at the bank, how about I give you the 2 gold coins plus the claim check for the 5 gold coins at the bank, and then you can just go and claim them." And from there, the ball started rolling and less and less people went to actually collect gold at the bank and started simply trading with the paper claims - which is what we currently know as paper bills. From there, it didn't take long before banks would just start printing money that was no longer 'backed up' by any gold at the bank. From this point onwards - we started trading with fiat currency - a currency that is not limited by the resources that is 'backing up' the value of the currency.

Why does that matter? It matters from the perspective that the amount of gold in the world is limited and therefore, the value of gold stays round about the same over time. What determines the value of gold? It's determined by how much of it is in circulation, and thus - by consequence, how much we are able to buy with it. So - let's take an example of a little village where 10 people live and there are in total 10 gold bars in circulation in this mini-economy. These 10 people have certain goods they want to buy and each a certain amount of gold that they are willing to spend on it. This determines the demand for the goods in the village. The suppliers balance their costs with profits - where they know that if they charge a high price, there will be less villagers able to buy the product, and if they charge a lower price it will become harder to make a profit and eventually even difficult to cover their costs. So - balancing demand and supply - a price for the goods is determined. Now - let's say that suddenly - instead of 10 bars of gold, there are 20 bars of gold - what will happen to the prices? They will go up because the demand goes up. Herein - understand that demand means: people want it and they can pay for it. So - when there is more money - it doesn't mean that people suddenly want more of something - it means they always wanted that amount, but they couldn't demand it because they didn't have the money to demand it. So - with demand increasing - the suppliers will realize that they can now charge a higher price - and so the prices of the goods in the village go up. What has happened to the value of gold? The value of gold decreased, because with the same amount of gold, people are now able to buy less of the goods - because the price went up.

So - with currency initially being backed up by gold - it limited how much money was in circulation - and so, it kept the value of money stable - because it was tied to the amount of gold that was available in the world. Gold is not something we can create - we can melt gold down and change the form but we cannot make new gold. So - the amount of gold we have in the world today is the same amount of gold that we had centuries ago. With fiat currency, however, reserve banks are able to simply print more paper money, increase the money supply - and in turn prices increase and the value of the money depreciates.

So far the reasoning of the economists seems sound - however, it is not - because they are misusing the term 'inflation'.

When they discuss inflation they assume that it means: the prices of all goods and services in an economy go up as a result of an increase in the money supply - and therefore, money becomes worth less and people can buy less and less stuff.

But what is not considered is the following: with inflation - the price of literally EVERYTHING in the economy goes up - and that includes the price of labor. So - from that perspective - if the prices of 'stuff' doubles, it's not a problem, because your wage would have doubled as well. And so - technically - yes - the nominal value of money depreciates - but the real value remains the same: you can buy less with one dollar, but you can still buy the same amount with your wage.

So - this reveals a problem in our current economic system - and how it is deviating from how things should be done. Let's take again the example of a village where there are 10 people and there are 100 dollars in circulation. If the money supply suddenly increases to 200 dollars, suppliers will up their price because the demand increased. Now - this higher price has to also increase the wages of those who work for the suppliers - and when their wage increase, they will have no problem paying the higher price. The wage of the workers would go up simply because they will demand a higher wage through their labor unions because otherwise they cannot pay the higher prices. But instead - what's been happening: the suppliers keep the wages of the laborers the same or only give them a slight increase - and instead: just make a lot more profit. And have a look - that's exactly what's been happening in the world. Why? Because when laborers demand higher wages - what do the bosses say? Well - if you don't want to work for that wage - I let you go and I will find someone worse off than you and have them do the work. That is why we have so many companies that closed down in Europe and America that moved to China and the third world in general - because they could profit from people being worse off there than in their country, that were willing to work for much lower wages.

And this is why within Living Income Guaranteed - we suggest that prices be determined according to the value that was put into it - which includes your labor. And valuing labor means: your workers must have a wage that allows them a certain lifestyle. This should be enshrined in the Constitution as a Human Right - otherwise one creates cycles of abuse where some win and most lose. And so - if all prices in the economy go up because of an increase in the money supply - your wages will have to increase simultaneously - otherwise you're committing a crime against life.

Herein, then - it doesn't matter whether you have fiat currency or not - becaue the real value of the currency remains the same. In the video they explain how the difference between currency and money is that money is a store of value - its value remains the same over time - and with currency this is not part of the definition. So - with making this one adjustment to the economic system, so that it would function how it is intended to function - we would be able to say that our fiat currency is in fact money - because the real value of the currency remains the same over time.

Is it a solution to step away from fiat currency and go back to silver and gold? No! Why not? Exactly because the amount of gold and silver in the world is limited - it doesn't change. But what does change? The amount of people in your economy. So - if you take  again the village of 10 people with 10 gold bars and let's say each owns one gold bar, but now they all make babies and suddenly there are 20 villagers and still the same 10 gold bars - you obviously have a problem - because now each villagers (assuming an egalitarian society) only owns half a gold bar. And yes - the value of gold remains the same: you can still buy the same amount of stuff with one gold bar before there were babies as you can after there were babies - but not everyone has a gold bar anymore - so the standards of living goes down anyway as you can suddenly buy less stuff.

So - to have your money supply absolutely the same over time, regardless of a change in population, is also counterproductive. When it comes to money creation - it should be calculated according to two points:
- available resources
- population

Furthermore - which is quite fascinating - in the video the economists point to history and how throughout history every fiat currency reverted back to zero - and therefore we should use gold/silver instead. But they ignore the fact that throughout history people have always also gone back to fiat currency - simply because it is much more convenient to carry around paper or a plastic card with a chip than a bunch of gold bars. I mean - making gold/silver the currency would eventually lead to history repeating itself, just because it's not practical to transport gold for transactions.

Therefore - instead of telling people to invest in gold and silver because currency will become worthless - and then at least you have something to trade with - rather correct the problem with fiat currency so that it works for everyone.

We continue in the next blog with our discussion on money and currencies where we'll have a look at the nonsense of having currencies with different values.

Related articles

• Day 251: Living Income Guaranteed and Market Mechanics
• Day 252: The Rich Be Cursed, The Rich Be Blessed
• Day 247: Only in a Broken System does Misery equal Profit
• Day 226: Living Income Guaranteed will Prevent Destruction of Homes
• Day 339: Why the CommonWealth was Never the Common Good

Read More

Day 241: Will Inflation be a Problem with Providing a Living Income Guaranteed?

‘Inflation’ is one of those big posh words that people like to use when they want to show off that they’re “in the know” of economics and money mechanics. You hear it on the news, tv, the internet and when you listen to other people talk about it, it never really becomes clear ‘what it is’ or ‘why it is so important’. But you won’t ask about it because you don’t want to appear like you’re “not in the know”. It’s kind of like the story of The Emperor's New Clothes, where only ‘smart people can see’ the clothes and where everyone pretends that they can see his wonderful clothes while he’s actually walking around in his undies (or naked depending on your source )… It’s just something everyone has agreed upon has ‘great importance’ but no-one really knows the “how’s” and “what’s” and no-one questions it.

So is inflation really this ‘big’ and ‘complicated’ concept that only our economists are in the know about? Not really. I mean, one of the first things you will learn when getting to the topic of inflation is that there is very little known about the exact causes of inflation and how good or bad it is for the economy. Most of the time, the concept will be used to suite the authors ideological standpoint and so you get a lot of conflicting answers to the same question.

So what is inflation? Inflation (because no-one really knows how it works) has been given a very simple and broad definition – so that you can’t really ‘go wrong’ with it:

“Inflation simply refers to the continuous increase of prices in an economy. So - two points are important to note: if prices go up and then remain stable for a while, we don't refer to it as inflation, as inflation only applies to a continuous increase in prices. Secondly - if the price of petrol keeps rising, but all other prices remain somewhat stable, we're also not dealing with inflation, because in the case of inflation all prices keep rising.” 

This is taken from one of our previous blogs we made which was on the topic of Inflation, so if you want to read up about it you can do so here: Day 64: Inflation - Part 1 (also read the comments).

So you see, inflation is nothing scary or complicated, it’s just prices of all things going up and up over time. When the ‘issue’ of inflation is brought up, it’s not so much the rising of the prices that is an issue – but the wages that lag behind. Because what happens is that you used to be able to buy say a thousand breads with your monthly salary, and with the prices going up and your wage remaining the same – you can now suddenly only buy 800 breads. So here, you have a problem because your purchasing power has been diminished. Because obviously so long as you keep the variables on either side of your equation in proportion – you won’t have a problem and you’ll be able to buy just as much. It’s only when one variable goes up and the other one stays the same or lowers – that you get a problem in your proportions. What happens then is that people will start buying a lot and hogging things because they fear the future prices which will be higher, but then within this increase in consumption place the products in ‘higher demand’ and thus up the prices again – so it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy to the point where you get hyperinflation.

So with putting into place a Living Income Guaranteed to ensure everyone’s Living and placing in a Minimum Wage amounting to double the LIG – yes, your prices will go up and so yes, that could be considered ‘inflation’. But remember that inflation in itself a neutral manifestation – meaning, it just is what it is as pricing going up. It doesn’t mean anything else. It only starts meaning something else when we fail to adjust ourselves where nominal wages remain the same while real wages go down. So yes, there will be inflation but it won’t be a problem from the perspective that your prices are directly linked and interconnected to your wages where at all times your Living is Guaranteed and thus your wages / living income will adjust to the prices to make sure everyone is able to live decently and vice versa where your prices will adjust to ensure that you get a decent wage. Here one must also consider that we will have Bureaus of Standards in place managing Quality Assurance and Control where there will be a move from obsolescence and disposability to quality and durability – which means that you will have to buy less.

So from that perspective – the whole “inflation” horror story will become something of the past as it simply won’t be able to affect anyone to the point where it does damage, as your wages and prices are no longer separate bodies but closely connected and intertwined. You will thus at all times, be protected.

Another point where inflation becomes a problem is when it is linked to a growing money supply without a matching growth in economic activity. So when the government for instance decides to finance its debt simply by printing money – you suddenly have an increase in your money supply which makes money ‘worth less’ (because ‘scarcity’ makes things ‘more valuable’ and so the opposite happens). Because this money came out of nowhere without originating or being connected to any form economic activity of real value such as labor and production – your system / equation gets thrown out of balance and all these money born out of ‘no value’ in turn has the effect devaluing / tainting all other money already present.

This type of situations will not be occurring within a Living Income Guaranteed as proposed by the Equal Life Foundation, as you will be able to discern for yourself from our previous blog on banking: Day 240: A Bank for the People, as banking/financing will always be directly related to actual activity, actual growth and actual value – and will thus not be able to throw the system out of balance.

Also check out Will the Living Income Guaranteed cause Inflation?, to get a new perspective on Inflation and to see and realize how inflation it its traditional use of the word has become a distraction of the actual Inflation taking place in our lives and in the economy – where inflation is an actual problem.

Related articles

• Day 330: Inflated Egos, Deflate Reality.
• Day 252: The Rich Be Cursed, The Rich Be Blessed
• Day 251: Living Income Guaranteed and Market Mechanics
• Day 227: The Myth of Conscious Buying
• Day 226: Living Income Guaranteed will Prevent Destruction of Homes

Read More

Day 79: Monetary Policy - Part 2

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to think that it is normal that banks are able to lend out money they don't have and, on top of that, charge an interest fee - which means that, when the bank wants to collect money owed to it - it will receive funds from various different individuals plus interest - and as such sucking all the funds towards itself, out of people's wallets.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to think that the story of the money supply is really as simple as it is as how it is presented in economic textbooks - while, in actual fact - money doesn't just 'get created'. Because when a loan is given and some positive number is written in a person's account - at the same time a negative number is created: as debt - and thus, even though it seems that money was created, it did not, because the debt must be paid - and the debt must be paid to those who created the money out of thin air: the banks.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to see and realise that the apparent 'generosity' of banks in 'wanting to help you out' with buying a new house or a new car, is attached to a day of reckoning, where outstanding funds are collected and if the moneys can't be paid - the bank will take everything you own and you are left with nothing - and herein there is no mercy or generosity - only the actual reality of the situation: Greed.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to question a world where each one apparently has the right to a decent life, but where, if one is unfortunate or has made a bad decision in life - one can end up in a situation where one's house, car and all valuable assets are taken away, becaues the bank is trying to mitigate its losses and what that means to you is really irrelevant as you are just one little player in their big money-making scheme.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise the absolute abhorrence of the nature of the human race if we think it is okay and acceptable and normal that wealth and money come before each one's basic human rights - and where we don't even stop to think what it means if banks have the ability to take away people's houses just because a person doesn't have enough money - instead of realising: who the fuck cares how much money a person has - each person needs a house to live in - as a human being, it is a simple common sensical point to take care of one another and make sure each one has a fucking roof over there head - who the fuck are we if we can't even fulfil such a simple, basic point?

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to define a person's worth according to the number in their bank accounts, instead of realising that a number is just that: a number - it doesn't even refer to anything real, it is just a digital picture - instead of realising the value of the person as a physical human being and treating each person as such - an equal - because we all breathe, we all shit, we all eat, we all piss - and therefore no-one can say that they are better than another from a physical stand-point - we are all the same - and therefore, any value system must consider our actual physical reality and recognise the equality of reality - instead of entertaining the inequalities of all the fictional parts that we perceive to form part of reality, such as money, opinions, thoughts, beliefs, etc. - because if our value system only considers fiction, then we disregard the physical reality - and this can be measured in fact, as we see the status of the physical world deteriorating each day, with more species going extict, with more air and water being polluted, with more land becoming unarable, with weatherconditions increasingly becoming more erratic, with natural habitats being destroyed each day.

Read More

Day 75: The Demand for Money - Part 1

Within the previous blogs, we've looked at the Supply side of Money [Day 71: The Money Supply - Part 1, Day 72: The Money Supply - Part 2]. Within this blog we'll be looking at the demand side of things.

At any point in time, people can hold their wealth in various different forms, such as 'real assets' with include things such as property, "valuable items" such as paintings, rare carpets, antiques, etc. and 'financial assets'. Within financial assets we can further distinguish between money and bonds.

Bonds are a financial tool where the debtor promises to regularly repay the owner interest and will pay back the capital amount at a certain date. Governments for instance work with bonds to finance some of its expenditure.

Within this context, the demand for money is the amount that the different members in the economy plan to hold in the form of money balances. Remember that the demand for money is not the same as the ‘want’ for money. So within the context of the ‘demand for money’ – we are only looking at those members of the economy who have an income / possess wealth. You can read up on the concept of Demand within Day 49, 50 and 51.

When looking at the demand of money we are looking at a few factors:

·         Money for the purpose of transactions

·         Money for the purpose of precaution

·         Money within speculation

These three points refer to functions money can have. Money is a universal tool for transactions, you need money readily available for you to do your groceries, for companies to pay their workers, etc. People also save their money for unseen events and expenditures.

When looking at the speculation point within money, we are basically looking at the trade-off between holding wealth as money, which is a flexible form as it can be exchanged at any time for something else– and holding bonds – which are more inflexible, but on which one can gain interest. The demand for money is thus directly related to the function it performs, and what function the wealth owner prefers best.

So depending and the person, and their circumstance – they will either prefer to hold some/most of their wealth as cash and demand deposits – or as bonds on which they can gain interest.
Within this, the particular interest rate which is being applied plays a role. A person might want to keep their wealth in the form of cash / demand deposits because he/she values the liquidity of money in this form more than bonds at an ‘x’ interest rate – but if the interest rate suddenly goes up, the person might change their mind as they can see that they could be making more money through having bonds, and so will forego the liquidity of cash for bonds (until the interest rate drops again). Within the concept of ‘supply and demand’ – we saw that prices are the main determinants which direct supply and demand for goods and services. Within this context, we can view the ‘interest rate’ as a price being put on loanable funds. And so, as the price goes up (high interest rate being paid out) – the more people will be willing to move some of their wealth in in the form cash/demand deposits – to holding it in the form of bonds.

(There are various interest rates, such as the repo rate, interbank lending rate, prime rate of banks, rates on deposits, mortgage rates, government stock rates,… and so the list goes on. At this point you do not require to know what all these different interest rates do/mean – all you need to know is that there are different ones. And that although there are different ones, they will follow the same pattern in their movement (up or down). So when we speak of ‘the interest rate’, it should be seen as a ‘representative’ rate for all the individual rates which are in play.)

When I first heard about 'the demand for money' -- I immediately went within myself 'Oh cool, now we are going to learn how the money supply has to adapt to the amount of people and levels of poverty -- because if there's more people / a lot of poverty obviously a lot of money is demanded because these people require money so they can access basic resource in order to sustain themselves'. So I was in for quite a disappointment when I learned that the 'demand for money' has got nothing to do with people and them being able to take care of themselves. It only cares about those who have money and how they act within their self interest in terms of whether they want to be flexible with their money or want to make money out of money. No consideration whatsoever for real issues -- a very big disappointment indeed.

Related articles

• Day 71: The Money Supply - Part 1
• Day 50: Resource Distribution - Part 2
• Day 67: The Functions of Money
• Day 88: Advanced Economics
• Day 103: Passion for Economics
• Day 128: Economic Slavery and True Activism

Read More