economic decentralization

<p style=“text-align: center;”>Democracy and freedom can no longer be fully and independently secure in a single country; its defense in a world saturated with injustice and inhabited by billions of people who are denied human dignity will inevitably corrupt their own values.</p>
The future of democracy and freedom can only be made secure on a planetary scale!
|| Bauman ||

Of course, economics has to do with the laws of nature, with energy consumption and entropy, not with selfish determinism.

However, formulators of economic designs from around the world have already discovered that economics has more to do with humanity, culture, ethics and consciential evolution than with mechanism.
|| James Marins ||
Can a decentralized currency economy generate greater control over future directions? Would the new groups of cryptocoin, with their projects and global ideas, be the change in the form of consumption? Being able to choose which project your money will be invested in, would controlling capital be a possible decentralized behavior?

 

 

 

Market economy or planned economy?

@sabolina Market economy!

No! Why?

@sabolina Wouldn’t freedom of choice bring about decentralization?

What freedom do you speak of?

 

Market economy has given us runaway climate change

 

 

Market economy had given us this

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/worlds-billionaires-have-more-wealth-than-4point6-billion-people-oxfam-report-today-2020-01-19/

 

Market economy has given us a pandemic with a lack investment into vaccine research and enough PPE in resrve but plenty of money spent on armaments and financial speculation

 

The slump creates demand for change. If there is no social engagement, the response will not be effective. Choosing the form of monetary transaction can be social cohesion.
We have Nano, we have Geometric Energy. . .

Free market is the freedom of the fox in the hen house.

To create money was a state privilege as it allowed every one to be sure that there would not be on the market more money than needed.

Since the Reagan-Thatcher years, banks create money and now crypto moneys.

The first consequence is inflation, not inflation of consumers goods given the state of the economy and the level of wages, but inflation of the price of capital investments.

May 1982, Dow Jones index was at 2284, today it is at 31 396

First of January 1972, 1 once of gold was 43, 5 $, nowadays it is roughly 1800 $.

3th of January 1975, median price of a home in USA was 25 000 $, nowadays, it is 275 000 $. Adjusted for inflation, price went from 160 000 to 275 000 $.

Inflation of consumer goods prices in USA: In 1974, consumer goods price index was 50, nowadays it is roughly 260

In 1975, in USA, the national average wage index was 9 226, 48, in 2019, it was 54 099, 99.

What does it means ?

That rich people are much richer, that poor have stayed poor, but that a big part of the rich money, is casino money !!!

But this money is no help for economy. In fact, it is a disaster in the making. This disaster is only prevented because states and central bank keep feeding the monster.

If decentralization of economy means more freedom given to big business and speculation, situation will coming worst, while seeming to become better.

 

 

 

 

@elainegerente, just FYI, sabolina’s questions will not get any deeper or involve additional theory or data, he just likes to challenge people. But, you can pivot off of him if you like, you’re off to a good start.

@morgankane01, inflation doesn’t equate to the rich get richer. An inflationary/growth system could have easily included everyone. Growth probably would have been slower, but gold would still be worth more because we know more things we can do with gold and it continues to be scarce, houses would be worth more because they have much more to them besides sticks and paper. The thing where a nice house in the neighborhood brings up the value of the neighboring land is a little more complicated but would happen under the most egalitarian versions of a market system.

The people who create capital, the ones who understand how governments can “print” money, and know where value begins, also know that common knowledge about governments balancing their budgets or things like the gold standard are obsolete. Many of those same people perpetuate those myths because if enough people figure it out, then things like universal basic income will start to make sense. That’s when money will begin to transfer back to the people who are actually creating the value.

It’s always (well back into the ‘80s) seemed to me that allowing all these corporate mergers right and left was our generations’ first fatal flaw.

Removing the assault rifle ban was another, but that’s changing the subject.

Though both created runaway monsters that we seem incapable of controlling, no matter how much damage they inflict on us as people, and to our society.

@lausten, tnks for the tip!

.

Rule 01: Nothing static, everything moves!
A centralizing government and regulator of the economy and market, what do you discuss?

.
Letting the government make the choices for you does not seem healthy to me, as there are great possibilities for restrictions. Regulatory governments, such as Cuba, create a closed market with high economic control. There, as mentioned by the colleague above, salary did not inflate, everyone earns $ 20 - $ 50 monthly and with market offers, both for consumption and for generating capital.
It would be almost naive to compare the value of a simple apple bought in 1870 to one bought today. Process and medium have changed, product may be the same, but it is no longer subjected to the same system.
Today the apple and plant are miles away from the final point of sale. Its planting requires quality control and management. He travels in refrigerated chambers until he reaches the counter of a market, where we have his sale value available. How many processes and values ​​were generated? The 1870 apple does not grow on the land next to it.
You are not required to buy an apple, but the option is given.
Wouldn’t “inflationary” costs be the value that was generated by the entire economic environment in its development?
Paper money “depreciated”, but its purchasing power today is much greater compared to the past decades.
Well, for now, I’ll stop here!

Market Economy = Corporate Greed. There is no freedom in that except for people like the Waltons. Ads are nothing more than a brainwashing of how you need a product that you really don’t need or it’s a need, but you need said brand because it’s better, when it isn’t really.

The apple example is interesting. In 1870, you either lived near someone who had them or if you were in an urban area you had a vendor or two to choose from. The idea of getting them from another state would be for the super rich only. Now that’s flipped, shipping and commodities markets make all apples compete and it’s about the supermarket that’s close to you, not the orchards. There’s some advantage to “local” food, but not much. If there is an orchard, they either figure out the supply chain or they can specialize and usually charge a little more, catering to the consumer who will make a special trip, just for really good apples.

Also in that mix, something that’s harder to calculate, is the work that a family was doing that didn’t involve money changing hands. They had to spend time in their day getting to the general store, battering with food producers, much more food preparation, making their own clothes, etc. Those don’t add up to much GDP. Some see them as hardships but some see them as the joy of making things with their hands and the social interactions that came with them.

Not sure where I’m going with this, just pointing out some options that we sometimes forget.

Many formats of government and economies look good on paper. But just add humans, and it all goes down hill from there.

Primarily as @mriana said: “Greed” for either power or money.

 

@mrmhead That includes a democratic Republic like the U.S. The fact is, Market Economy does equal corporate greed.

Do you know what the “trickle-down” economic model reminds me of?

A rich guy having a tax deductible $ 1200.00 dinner, then taking a shit for the poor guy to clean up at a taxable $12.00 pr/hr.

There is your trickle-down economy.

Can a decentralized currency economy generate greater control over future directions? Would the new groups of cryptocoin, with their projects and global ideas, be the change in the form of consumption? Being able to choose which project your money will be invested in, would controlling capital be a possible decentralized behavior? - OP
When was it that the economy had taken a dump and groups of merchants or something like that created their own money-credits /currency?

I saw a google hit or two related to coronavirus, but it was before that. … still looking

 

Edit - apparently it’s happened not infrequently throughout history … refining search terms…

 

Although, under lying all that is a certain human nature - greed seems fairly ubiquitous. From my reading of history most the time when someone gets more power, said someone gets the greedier, often more vicious. Once in a while an enlightened leader comes along, but it never seem to last. In end the despotism, ruthless, always coupled with disregard and ignorance seems to win the day.

Enlightened leaders tend to get assassinated!

Would the Toronto Dollar be an example of a decentralized currency?

Those participating would be supporting the funding of social programs.

It lasted 15 years.