Taking The Concept of ClearingHouse Up Into The Wild Blue Yonder

Searching........going to the Search Engine.
Search starts here to understand the concept of Clearing House.  I have blogged previously about the concept of Clearing House.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearing_house

The concept of ClearingHouse is mostly applicable to Finance simply because it is the first born concept Object:Child and by birth order claims some Stakeholder first born bragging rights as the privileged child to claim some conceptual inherited ownership of the EntitledParent:Finance.  Really only a NominalNamed:EntitledParent:(Finance) because the concept, which is a good one originating in the ProblemDomain:Financial, has leaped out of that of that Domain:Specific to become an Object:Model carrying inherited attributes to multiple other ProblemDomains.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearing_house_%28finance%29

In the ProblemDomain:Financial a ClearingHouse may have many different financially related Children of the Object:Parent:ClearingHouse:Financial depending on the set of attributes inherited by Object:Parent:ClearingHouse:Financial:Child.   One of those Children is......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACHA
It appears to be a Child that inherited a most basic Parent:Attribute set.  Call it a Child:Attributes:SimpleSet.  I call it that because the Attributes:SimpleSet are those object attributes, methods and messages that its ParentObject inherited from its ParentObject.

ObjectOriented:Thinking identifies Parent/Child relationships by asking what Object:(Thing) is the Parent Object of this Child?

Sidebar:  In other words... follow abstraction form of MyLanguage and say Words:Other?.... but that carries my on the fly development of an personal Artificial Language beyond where I want to go and furthermore beyond anything even resembling the rigorous development of a formal language structure that only makes it a "let's pretend but I am sure that you may get the idea" language.

So, what happens here is that the Object:Parent:ClearingHouse has a higher order Parent to be discovered.  Actually: Many Higher Order multiple logic ObjectParents that contributed their Attributes to the ProblemDomain:Financial.

What is the Object:Parent of the conceptual Object:Finance?

Might it be (Perhaps leaping a couple intermediate Parents in ObjectAttribute lineage)....

Debit=Credit relationship where one thing is the same as (equal to or in notation "=") that is born (given ObjectLife)  as pure and only
       (most universal and essential to the creation of any and all objects, natural or concetual)
function of ObjectTime?

Object:Time being the Object:Single:Parent:Function from which all Objects (Things and their implementing relationships descend as Objects?

Time only has Object:TopDog dominance determining  the the ObjectOriented scheme of AllThings once and one only.  That occurs only once at the first time instance of creation.  After that it became for all eternity a Function that put any Two/Things together as it continues to create. 

Where does looking at Things from this point of view, from this point of entry to the ProblemDomain get me?

To the eternal point I always return to: Climbing a tree to get to the moon?  Rapid initial progress but beyond that?  Or is it a ladder on top of a ladder in a conceptual climb to get to heaven?

Often I wonder where it is going but those seen to become way points on a continuing journey...?

Is each day lived over and over for a lifetime of the same day
  or
is each day a new different day carrying me to somewhere?

Are both true?

Sigh......

Back to the mines of thinking about how a concept thing called ClearingHouse can be a SilverBullet to solve the ProblemDomain of SocialSelfGovernance.

Maybe a step along the way to discovery has been taken by using the Debit/Credit creation model of the constraining balance of things being the model where Constraints among the functional relationships of things (actions between things) are a better way to manage the problems that the establishment of Imperative functional rules?

It is beginning to look like....again....and again...that the Object Oriented approach employing the nature of Constraints among Objects as the functional balancing servant of OperatingSystem design is better than the Functional Approach of establishing ImperativeActions that are dominant determining drivers and by nature of design restriction dictators of relationships among Object Things.

Maybe one is Freedom and the other is Tyranny?

This I know:  (I think)

The concept of "Vote" has both and Object and Function apect.  What we build into the attributes methods and messages of the Object:Vote determine its functional application.

The Information Age is premised (like nature) on an ObjectOriented design to produce functional relationships among Objects.  It is taking us and will continue to take us out of the Imperative of Functional design to define what Functions we determine by system definition to control a FunctionOriented System.

Maybe the difference between what builds itself out of things inter-operating naturally and what we build our of dictating their functional rules to make them operate.

We can't dictate the functional rules of the natural world only discover their inherent properties (truths) and apply them and their inherent object abilities to implement functional relationships among themselves as objects from the micro to the macro levels.

We can dictate the functional rules of any conceptual world we desire to create outside the box of the natural world.  3+2 can equal 6 if we so wish in that concepetual world dominated by a functional rule that says the numerically greater object in the relationship can decide by a functional rule whatever it prefers to be the result of a relationship between itself and another object.

An alternate result in any conceptual world we create outside the box of nature is that the functional determinant dominating rule is our choice the the numerically lesser or least object is dominant to determine or confer control of the resulting relationship between itself and another object.

Enough is enough.

It is a nice day to make an object oriented relationship between myself and a pair of snowshoes to discover what naturally results from all the constraining interacting objects (including myself like a selfie in a picture)  and the results of object properties I am related to over time, whatever that may be......what will be will be as naturally as I allow them to be by the interaction of their constraints that I do not control.

I only control my perception of the natural results of relating to objects of nature.  A conceptual perception in my head in accordance with my own rules that say what I do drives what I enjoy....results being joy or no joy.
   or
What I enjoy as an object relationship between my inherent self and any other object of nature that my functionally driven rules says all is good.  Life is good. 

Sunday thoughts on a Saturday.