simple rate of interest of 4% ?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Allan H <allanh1946@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay I have been doing a lot of thinking ... well I am sure there are
> enough good ideas that can radically change the world.. Oddly I really do
> not think it will take massive amounts,, but it will take some funds and I
> have a lot of faith in our group to be able to develop workable ideas..
> Now to put my money with my mouth is even though I do not have massive
> amounts of money I can easily contribute 100 Euro to commit to a fund to
> change the world.. I do not know if others are willing to develop a world
> improvement fund. as I know this discussion will go one for years after we
> are gone I could for see it still in existence 500 onward..
> there needs to be unchangeable able rules like
> The principle can not be spent..
> No more than 20 % of the income can be spent on fund administration.
> 20 % of the income generated must be added to the principle every year, (or
> more often)
> How the 60 % well .. some types of projects just do not make nor are meant
> to make money just for the improvement of society some where..
> Now there is even a small amount of money available.
> We need to discuss how to set it up maybe I have it all confused,, anyways
> I will send the money to where it is decided to set up the funds,, There is
> one hundred Euro available sitting in a tin behind me.. If others do
> contribute it should be in amounts of their own currency and to an amount
> that will not cause harm to them or thier families... as once the money is
> gone it is gone and can not be expect to have it returned.
> If we set it up and develop it correctly in five hundred years that 100
> Euros will have a value if it grows at a simple 4% of:
> 32,860,158,157.oo Euro
> 32 billion is an amount that can have some on going effects to improve
> society.. It is called putting your money where your mouth is.. The
> question is who wants to run it.. I am not able to Vam? Molly? Neil? Chris?
> Rigsy? hmmm
> Allan
>
>
>
> Because
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Vam <atewari2007@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Ah, Rigs... that isn't as tragic... as the fact that Cheats are Elites
>> and Elites are Thieves !
>>
>> On Oct 24, 2:23 pm, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Machines/technology are replacing human labor. Children might do
>> > better being educated via computer and leave socialization to play
>> > groups and sports. The military can effect as much damage via remote
>> > control. But- will women return to being stay-at-home moms/homemakers
>> > thus freeing up what jobs remain for the men? I doubt it - it has
>> > become an ego/security matter for Western women. There will always be
>> > cheats and thieves, Archytas, who cause as much monetary losses as the
>> > "elites"- it's all relative, depending on the number of zeros.
>> >
>> > On Oct 24, 1:37 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > There was philosophy once called logical positivism. \\it's people
>> > > were well-intentioned, like Russell and Carnap. If you have a few
>> > > hours to spare I could explain its basics - in the end it got so
>> > > concerned with words they were all that was left. Strangely it was
>> > > accused of being crude in its use of brute fact.
>> >
>> > > The problem as I see it is that we want democracy but have not found a
>> > > way to accept its biggest flaw - that of decisions made through the
>> > > sway of ignorance, and further problems with the corruption of
>> > > representatives. Attempts at a fix of this in perfection are doomed
>> > > or the equivalent of fiddling while Rome burns.
>> >
>> > > One might try to produce communication free of ideology and this let
>> > > Reason alone have power (Habermas) - but as far as I can see this
>> > > never works - and Habermas only suggests his 'ideal speech situation'
>> > > as an ideal type (following Weber).
>> >
>> > > The best positive I can reach is that we could change our material
>> > > conditions to produce less discontent. To get to an understanding of
>> > > this we need to agree on some basic facts - and the move towards these
>> > > is critical. People as old as Orn and myself can remember when it was
>> > > possible for most in the West to get somewhere near this because there
>> > > were plenty of well paid jobs about. Oversimplifying a lot this is
>> > > not now the case and we need to establish what the new conditions are.
>> >
>> > > Productivity is vastly enhanced from the times in which our work
>> > > ethics arose. My guess is we could get by quite nicely on a 30hr
>> > > working week and a 40 week year with retirement at 60 whilst
>> > > increasing current production. I am only guessing, but the reason I
>> > > have to guess is odd. Why don't we know? There are perhaps a dozen
>> > > vital areas like this to which we have no accepted answers.
>> >
>> > > The positive moves are all about establishing facts and the first of
>> > > these has to be an explanation of why we are so bad at this and
>> > > whether new technology can help break the 'spell'. Here, the paradox
>> > > is we need the technology to start working to this end with most
>> > > people not able to understand why and an existing situation in which
>> > > dominant education and media will try to pervert any attempts.
>> >
>> > > Many are discussing these issues in great detail. I'm sure a few of
>> > > us could put a '101' together from Internet sources. Semiotics is a
>> > > key discipline in the critique (Michael Betancourt), as is
>> > > environmental science (as opposed to the Kymer Vert) and most
>> > > economics that you don't get on Fox and the increasingly dumb BBC
>> > > (Steve Keen) One can even argue the Tea Party and OccupyX have
>> > > similar protest issues. You can get a radical smear of this on the
>> > > Keiser Report (courtesy on Russia Today).
>> >
>> > > The aim is already worked out - a return to economies with a link
>> > > between toil (labour value) and reward and money in people's hands,
>> > > not hoarded by an elite or subject to their looting- and meaningful
>> > > democracy.
>
>
> --
> (
> )
> |_D Allan
>
> Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
>
>
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário