Will you support a full objective evaluation of the “money system” from a strict system dynamics perspective?
Please take this into consideration:
1) The money system is a mere component of the economy whose dynamic status can be determined to be either stable (passive or active), unstable (active).
2) Being a purely human construct “money" requires a formal objectively evaluable ontological definition. Yet there is no consensus on what money is.
3) “Money" has been iterated ad hoc over informally assumed notions of it, taken by rote in spite of being ontologically undecidable.
4) How, in the event of constituting an unstable component of the economy, the "money system" produces economic imperatives that destabilise economic components that assume them as requirements.
5) Financial/economic units ($, €, etc..) also lack any formal (decidable) definitions rendering indeterminate any calculations in terms of these units vis-à-vis the “real” economy.
I think such an inquiry is long overdue as it seems evident that money imperatives seem to override most if not all other concerns; and not having independent existence of humans, “money" needs to be fully defined and specified like any other technological device applied to the real world.
Unfortunately, because everyone's survival and hope for individual prosperity as members of society are intertwined with money, when it comes to evaluating it as a mere technology all reason seems to be abandoned by most. Hopefully this will not prove to be the case with your organisation.
Will you support a full objective evaluation of the “money system” from a strict system dynamics perspective?
Please take this into consideration:
1) The money system is a mere component of the economy whose dynamic status can be determined to be either stable (passive or active), unstable (active).
2) Being a purely human construct “money" requires a formal objectively evaluable ontological definition. Yet there is no consensus on what money is.
3) “Money" has been iterated ad hoc over informally assumed notions of it, taken by rote in spite of being ontologically undecidable.
4) How, in the event of constituting an unstable component of the economy, the "money system" produces economic imperatives that destabilise economic components that assume them as requirements.
5) Financial/economic units ($, €, etc..) also lack any formal (decidable) definitions rendering indeterminate any calculations in terms of these units vis-à-vis the “real” economy.
I think such an inquiry is long overdue as it seems evident that money imperatives seem to override most if not all other concerns; and not having independent existence of humans, “money" needs to be fully defined and specified like any other technological device applied to the real world.
Unfortunately, because everyone's survival and hope for individual prosperity as members of society are intertwined with money, when it comes to evaluating it as a mere technology all reason seems to be abandoned by most. Hopefully this will not prove to be the case with your organisation.
You Have Been Served
https://bibocurrency.com/index.php/downloads-2/19-english-root/learn/300-you-have-been-served
Marc Gauvin and all the international members/MSTA
I'm not in those markets ... but I kind of like the guy. Rereshing honesty about what's going on.
Me too. Not in the marker - but I care to understand. And my sense is he has courage, honesty, integrity.