I cut the label off from a towel I took out of the dryer this morning. I noticed the label while I was folding the towel and recalled what the person that had used it said about label tags, she did not like them, did not like corporate advertising attached to the things that we personally own. Things that are ours, not theirs nor theirs to attach their names to as if they had some rights to continue their to assert some aspect of their prior ownership of the item they may have created but now is mine.
A label on a towel is a small thing. However, I went to the kitchen, got my scissors (stamped in the plastic handle: Fiskars, USA) and cut off the label. An act of rebellion or statement that this is mine, entirely mine!
After 10 years I bought a new van. Before selling the old van I took off the navy shield that had been my cap device on my navy uniform cap. I had taken off the big "H" symbol (Honda) on the hood of the van and replaced it with the cap device. I put the big H back on when I sold it and put the cap device on the front of my Miata. The new van now has a big round gold medallion on the hood and an Ironman finisher medal on the back. Both had been sitting in a drawer for a long time.
My vehicles belong to me now, not their makers. I put whatever I want on them. Just a symbolic statement that they are mine!!!! Double exclamation point! I do not owe anything to the maker. It has no claim on me. I may express my satisfaction with the maker or dis-satisfaction as the case may be but there are no ties that bind me.
We are so bound by so many ties, strings and labels that come with real and conceptual things that attempt to connect us to their origin when there is no real connection that binds us to them except some label that continues to be attached to them. A label that really means something but is always there to remind us as if it did really mean something, still carries something from a time when the object, a real thing or a thought was not ours. When we did not claim or assert ownership.
Clipping off the label is cutting the claim. An assertion of ownership. It may have been created by another but it is mine now. I may have been created by another but I am mine now. That other has no claim on me. I only place upon myself those claims, obligations, associations that I choose not those chosen for me and attached to things that are truly mine. Things that are made mine because I choose to clip the label they once had and maybe replace it with my own label of choice!
We talked about changing names. A friend changed her first name to match her married last name although she has chosen a different last name now and nobody would know unless she told them the story of how and why she changed her name. Good for her to change her name if she chose to do that. A name is also a label that comes attached to us.
It is a strong sign of independence and ownership of self identity to change your label or the label that came with the thoughts and things that we have.
It is good to make a symbolic statement to cut the label off a towel.
While we carry the same name given to us, we create new names for ourselves when we choose a screen name which is so often required now for personal access and anonymous identification on the internet. Choice of screen names that I see on the internet frequently interest me. They are creative and expressive and perhaps express more than we may realize when we choose them?
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Language, Style, Versatility
This application of Javascript to express various creative literary styles simply fascinated me! I had to make a blog entry about it.
A technical computer programming language but our natural language is just as technical and just as elegant and can be utilized in as many different styles. Maybe that is why there are so many books. All based on just the letters in the alphabet put together in so many fascinating ways to say essentially the same thing in the gross analysis but say it uniquely, freshly, like it has never been said before in the micro analysis!
The ability of language, natural or otherwise to express our thoughts is without limit! This example of a programmer fantasizing how famous writers would have expressed themselves in a machine language that may seem to be the most unlikely medium and manner of expression reveals the creativity of using what seem to be uncreative tools at least uncreative when applied to produce exceptionally creative results.
A paint brush is also an uncreative tool. Perhaps all tools are uncreative and that is therefore the definition of a tool and what separates it from whatever it is used to produce. Increasingly, tools are used to create tools at both higher and lower conceptual levels. Where and when does tool making transition to art? It is becoming easier or more difficult to see the boundary? Is this a no boundary situation like Yin and Yang?
A technical computer programming language but our natural language is just as technical and just as elegant and can be utilized in as many different styles. Maybe that is why there are so many books. All based on just the letters in the alphabet put together in so many fascinating ways to say essentially the same thing in the gross analysis but say it uniquely, freshly, like it has never been said before in the micro analysis!
The ability of language, natural or otherwise to express our thoughts is without limit! This example of a programmer fantasizing how famous writers would have expressed themselves in a machine language that may seem to be the most unlikely medium and manner of expression reveals the creativity of using what seem to be uncreative tools at least uncreative when applied to produce exceptionally creative results.
A paint brush is also an uncreative tool. Perhaps all tools are uncreative and that is therefore the definition of a tool and what separates it from whatever it is used to produce. Increasingly, tools are used to create tools at both higher and lower conceptual levels. Where and when does tool making transition to art? It is becoming easier or more difficult to see the boundary? Is this a no boundary situation like Yin and Yang?
Sunday, January 27, 2013
The General Commons
Wikipedia has this description of the Commons which I think is a very narrow definition and there is a great amount of benefit to looking at the notion of Commons in a more general application to conceptual "social" things owned by society and their manipulation and extraction of value by the few at the expense of the many who own the general "social" commons and have increasingly less ability to defend them from special interest predation for economic benefit and social and political power acquisition.
From Wikipedia: (the entire description here)
Commons refers to the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of a society, including natural materials such as air, water, and a habitable earth. These resources are held in common, not owned privately. [1] The resources held in common can include everything from natural resources and common land to software.[2] The commons contains public property and private property, over which people have certain traditional rights. When commonly held property is transformed into private property this process alternatively is termed "enclosure" or more commonly, "privatization." A person who has a right in, or over, common land jointly with another or others is called a commoner.[3]
This is a follow on to my previous post discussing of Fraud as a Bubble. General fraud which is a violation of the public trust. The public trust being a general Public Common.
Bill Black discusses Control Fraud here today. Full disclosure here: Bill Black is my hero and I believe that everything he says is absolutely true. He is that one honest man that Diogenes searched for. I admire Diogenes also.
Regarding what Bill writes: Free private enterprise operates in the broadly defined Public Commons that is our society. Yes, of course is also operates in accordance with the defined controls of government which restrict it and control it to some extent that is viewed by free private enterprise as a violation of its ideological right to operate in any fashion that it pleases. Almost like the the gun right advocates. The greater sphere or the greatest sphere that free private enterprise operates in is the Public Commons. The place that everyone operates in: our social structure fabric of society defined by and regulated by the common things we all subscribe to, some of which are more formally defined by law. Define something by law and there is always an appropriate legal remedy for its violation. Otherwise there are only social remedies for violation of standards and expectations
From Wikipedia: (the entire description here)
Commons refers to the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of a society, including natural materials such as air, water, and a habitable earth. These resources are held in common, not owned privately. [1] The resources held in common can include everything from natural resources and common land to software.[2] The commons contains public property and private property, over which people have certain traditional rights. When commonly held property is transformed into private property this process alternatively is termed "enclosure" or more commonly, "privatization." A person who has a right in, or over, common land jointly with another or others is called a commoner.[3]
This is a follow on to my previous post discussing of Fraud as a Bubble. General fraud which is a violation of the public trust. The public trust being a general Public Common.
Bill Black discusses Control Fraud here today. Full disclosure here: Bill Black is my hero and I believe that everything he says is absolutely true. He is that one honest man that Diogenes searched for. I admire Diogenes also.
Regarding what Bill writes: Free private enterprise operates in the broadly defined Public Commons that is our society. Yes, of course is also operates in accordance with the defined controls of government which restrict it and control it to some extent that is viewed by free private enterprise as a violation of its ideological right to operate in any fashion that it pleases. Almost like the the gun right advocates. The greater sphere or the greatest sphere that free private enterprise operates in is the Public Commons. The place that everyone operates in: our social structure fabric of society defined by and regulated by the common things we all subscribe to, some of which are more formally defined by law. Define something by law and there is always an appropriate legal remedy for its violation. Otherwise there are only social remedies for violation of standards and expectations
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Restoring the Commons
This is an excellent statement here. It is about the importance of the Public Commons. Money is a social media we all use to make decisions about the use of resources. Raw resources or those resources that have been produced from raw resources including intellectual resources. Money is the common tool involved in the decision of what thing of value we will spend it upon.
It is really all about resource management not about money. It is about how much resources we have, not how much money. Those with the most money, collectively or individually have the greatest decision making power. Dividing between the have money and don't have (have not) money categories of people puts the category of have nots having little decision making power over the allocation of resources beyond the basic necessities of life they are all competing to obtain. The place where these people compete is the the commons. That is what they have to protect: The commons. The same commons resource that those with great amounts of power to make resource decisions with money seek to exploit.
We will reach a crises point where short term thinking has destroyed the commons and at that time radical ideas that will not be liked by those that used their money power to consume the resources of the commons find the resources are no longer there not can any amount of money have the power to do anything about the tragic situation of killing the common goose that laid all the golden eggs. The power of the people with then make the decisions and perhaps extract retribution for the excessive extraction of resources. One of those resources suffering about by those with money power to drive resource distribution being the the distribution of money itself in our society.
Some good things will be done to correct the problem of the consumption of the commons by privatization of the commons itself or the the privatization of the benefits of the commons by rent extraction. They will not be done until the crises point is reached. At that point the right to continue extract from the commons by those with money power will be defended by the government. Then there will be some hard decisions made determining if we really have a government of the people or of the people with money power.
The Commons are our resources. We use money to make decisions about their allocation.
We. Us. Ourselves are the Commons. Our own collective resource as human beings with thing that we possess that is our most valuable common resource: Our minds and the capability of applying those minds to produce the things for our lives both material and intellectual. Excessive extraction by those with money power from those with little money power.
It is really all about resource management not about money. It is about how much resources we have, not how much money. Those with the most money, collectively or individually have the greatest decision making power. Dividing between the have money and don't have (have not) money categories of people puts the category of have nots having little decision making power over the allocation of resources beyond the basic necessities of life they are all competing to obtain. The place where these people compete is the the commons. That is what they have to protect: The commons. The same commons resource that those with great amounts of power to make resource decisions with money seek to exploit.
We will reach a crises point where short term thinking has destroyed the commons and at that time radical ideas that will not be liked by those that used their money power to consume the resources of the commons find the resources are no longer there not can any amount of money have the power to do anything about the tragic situation of killing the common goose that laid all the golden eggs. The power of the people with then make the decisions and perhaps extract retribution for the excessive extraction of resources. One of those resources suffering about by those with money power to drive resource distribution being the the distribution of money itself in our society.
Some good things will be done to correct the problem of the consumption of the commons by privatization of the commons itself or the the privatization of the benefits of the commons by rent extraction. They will not be done until the crises point is reached. At that point the right to continue extract from the commons by those with money power will be defended by the government. Then there will be some hard decisions made determining if we really have a government of the people or of the people with money power.
The Commons are our resources. We use money to make decisions about their allocation.
We. Us. Ourselves are the Commons. Our own collective resource as human beings with thing that we possess that is our most valuable common resource: Our minds and the capability of applying those minds to produce the things for our lives both material and intellectual. Excessive extraction by those with money power from those with little money power.
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Fraud - The Biggest Bubble
This statement hits the big nail square on the head: Its simple; fraud is and always was the biggest bubble. Selling something that has little or no honest value and hyping it with deceit to make people believe that it is has value that the seller knows does not exist.
Fraud depends on the most basic rule of criminal trade: sell something that has neither intrinsic cost to produce nor the product of anything that has anything of value used in its production. Cost of goods sold = zero then profit = 100%.
Fraud at a more elegant level is the above equation but in addition having the government or some other agency give support, benefits and protection that increases return on investment (little or nothing) by insuring any risk of loss or perpetuating the ability to perpetrate fraud.
Fraud: A business model for criminals. Morally, deception and cheating are not social values but neither is killing. We have so far to go to improve our quality of life for all.
Maybe enterprises that improve the quality of life for all are the best investment?
Not until enterprises that improve the quality of life primarily for the benefit of few at the expense of many becomes a poor investment.
Bill Black is a hero Fraud Fighter. Where is the Fraud Fighting electronic game?
Simple honesty at all levels, personal to governmental and economic is and always will be the best policy. Often honesty is not easy or profitable but that is what makes it so glorious. Honesty is in the best interest of all and those that make personal sacrifice of losing something by being honest really lose nothing at all.....they only gain a greater good.
A dear friend recently had a washing machine in a rental needing repair. the repair person estimated a new bearing at $350 which she agreed to. The repair person found in disassembling the washer that lose coins and other things were really the problem and said the charge would only be $50 dollars, if that was not to much!
Why is it that simple honest people with perhaps less or much less than others like the 1% seem to be the ones that practice honesty and fair dealing. Let the buyer beware is the motto of those that institutionally cheat and steal. What they know that others don't and what they do not honestly tell them is a business model: That is fraud!
What we do not honestly tell others that need to know about our feelings and thinking regarding who and what we are, what we are truly committed to, what is covered up and twisted intentionally in our personal relationships, often with those closest to us is also fraud.
Fraud depends on the most basic rule of criminal trade: sell something that has neither intrinsic cost to produce nor the product of anything that has anything of value used in its production. Cost of goods sold = zero then profit = 100%.
Fraud at a more elegant level is the above equation but in addition having the government or some other agency give support, benefits and protection that increases return on investment (little or nothing) by insuring any risk of loss or perpetuating the ability to perpetrate fraud.
Fraud: A business model for criminals. Morally, deception and cheating are not social values but neither is killing. We have so far to go to improve our quality of life for all.
Maybe enterprises that improve the quality of life for all are the best investment?
Not until enterprises that improve the quality of life primarily for the benefit of few at the expense of many becomes a poor investment.
Bill Black is a hero Fraud Fighter. Where is the Fraud Fighting electronic game?
Simple honesty at all levels, personal to governmental and economic is and always will be the best policy. Often honesty is not easy or profitable but that is what makes it so glorious. Honesty is in the best interest of all and those that make personal sacrifice of losing something by being honest really lose nothing at all.....they only gain a greater good.
A dear friend recently had a washing machine in a rental needing repair. the repair person estimated a new bearing at $350 which she agreed to. The repair person found in disassembling the washer that lose coins and other things were really the problem and said the charge would only be $50 dollars, if that was not to much!
Why is it that simple honest people with perhaps less or much less than others like the 1% seem to be the ones that practice honesty and fair dealing. Let the buyer beware is the motto of those that institutionally cheat and steal. What they know that others don't and what they do not honestly tell them is a business model: That is fraud!
What we do not honestly tell others that need to know about our feelings and thinking regarding who and what we are, what we are truly committed to, what is covered up and twisted intentionally in our personal relationships, often with those closest to us is also fraud.
Saturday, January 19, 2013
Platinum Coin - Debt Free money
The Platinum coin, proposed as a way around the debt ceiling, is actually the best and only stepping stone to debt free money. Banks are the obstacle to debt free money. Debt is their business, control of the supply of money is how they do business and make money.
Ellen Brown writes an excellent statement on the Platinum Coin and its significance to taking back the power to create money that properly belongs to the people's government, not the banks.
Also by Ellen: http://www.theresourcebasedeconomy.com/2010/11/debt-web/
Ellen Brown writes an excellent statement on the Platinum Coin and its significance to taking back the power to create money that properly belongs to the people's government, not the banks.
Also by Ellen: http://www.theresourcebasedeconomy.com/2010/11/debt-web/
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Marketing and Money
Marketing is not Business 101 like I learned in the early 60's. It was advertising then. The Wikipedia description of "Marketing" show how the concept has progressed since the 60's. One of the aspects that Wikipedia does not cover is that Fraud is a Marketing Strategy.
Marketing digresses from my core focus on what money is to a look at what money does. It started this morning with reading some things at Financial Times (FT). I could not understand the complexity of what I was reading. In fact, many comments on what was written said the same thing. Unfortunately, FT requires a registration, fortunately it is free.
I defy anyone to understand what was written here at FT.
It is only in the comments that I find some meaning in what was written as readers express their interpretation:
Marketing digresses from my core focus on what money is to a look at what money does. It started this morning with reading some things at Financial Times (FT). I could not understand the complexity of what I was reading. In fact, many comments on what was written said the same thing. Unfortunately, FT requires a registration, fortunately it is free.
I defy anyone to understand what was written here at FT.
It is only in the comments that I find some meaning in what was written as readers express their interpretation:
Sunday, January 6, 2013
Open Source Systems
The metaphor for every conceptual system is the computer based information system Kernel, Operating System and Application Program. Name the system from Religion, Politics, Money, Science, Language, Family, etc. The metaphor applies in an Object Oriented Paradigm.
Everything can be expressed by this one shoe fits all statement?
Yes! Only a nerd would look at the world this way? It is no different than saying the bible is the metaphor.
The bible is just another expression of the basic metaphor. Some say it is the inspired word of God. It is simply an historical hierarchical proprietary operating system called religion ideology expressing the conceptual metaphor that has since been developed and refined by science to its best expression to date: The structure of information and knowledge existing on our computer systems. Our best structured thinking implemented on a machine tool.
There are many proprietary information system metaphors operating today on this computer system machine tool. All the system expressions of the Metaphor which are not proprietary, are public commons called Open Source.
This TED talk presents Open Source in a very simple manner that is one simple way to look at it.
Development an establishment of the Kernel, Operating System and Application Metaphor using Open Source methods creates the universal conceptual solutions of tomorrow to the problems that face the world today. Applying this Metaphor to our social systems employs the Computational Trinity of Logic, Language and Structure.
The solution to the problem domain of Money is that it must become an open source system. It was intended to be an open source system by our Constitution but became a proprietary system by the establishment of the Federal Reserve. Money and monetary systems are properly a Public Commons, Open Source Domain belonging to the people and the government of the people. The sovereign right of monetary system control must be reclaimed by the people and taken away from the banks. Banks are merely a category of users of monetary system applications having some limited and controlled proprietary rights as a user community.
Everything can be expressed by this one shoe fits all statement?
Yes! Only a nerd would look at the world this way? It is no different than saying the bible is the metaphor.
The bible is just another expression of the basic metaphor. Some say it is the inspired word of God. It is simply an historical hierarchical proprietary operating system called religion ideology expressing the conceptual metaphor that has since been developed and refined by science to its best expression to date: The structure of information and knowledge existing on our computer systems. Our best structured thinking implemented on a machine tool.
There are many proprietary information system metaphors operating today on this computer system machine tool. All the system expressions of the Metaphor which are not proprietary, are public commons called Open Source.
This TED talk presents Open Source in a very simple manner that is one simple way to look at it.
Development an establishment of the Kernel, Operating System and Application Metaphor using Open Source methods creates the universal conceptual solutions of tomorrow to the problems that face the world today. Applying this Metaphor to our social systems employs the Computational Trinity of Logic, Language and Structure.
The solution to the problem domain of Money is that it must become an open source system. It was intended to be an open source system by our Constitution but became a proprietary system by the establishment of the Federal Reserve. Money and monetary systems are properly a Public Commons, Open Source Domain belonging to the people and the government of the people. The sovereign right of monetary system control must be reclaimed by the people and taken away from the banks. Banks are merely a category of users of monetary system applications having some limited and controlled proprietary rights as a user community.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Platinum Coin
Joe Firestone continues to have the best solution to the money problem. Thesee are two recent statements he has made:
The President's Leverage: He Can Go Platinum!
and an update of things written about the Platinum Coin:
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/category/joe-firestone-2
Beyond the MSM: the New Wave of Brief Blog Posts on Platinum Coin Seigniorage
Krugman wrote about the Platinum Coin today:
Debt In A Time Of Zero
The President's Leverage: He Can Go Platinum!
and an update of things written about the Platinum Coin:
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/category/joe-firestone-2
Beyond the MSM: the New Wave of Brief Blog Posts on Platinum Coin Seigniorage
Krugman wrote about the Platinum Coin today:
Debt In A Time Of Zero
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)