#156. Actual fantasy #GrubStreetJournal @StevenBKurtz

Selection_449.jpg

Selection_450.jpg

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2019/10/13/156-actual-fantasy/

“That means that, whilst as purists we might prefer to set out our findings in calories, BTUs and joules, we have to talk in dollars, euros and yen if we’re to secure a hearing. It also means that we need models of the economy based firmly on energy principles.”

This conflates Apples and Oranges particularly when one talks of Borrowing Value from the future.
Debt is a claim on future Wealth but not future wealth. If wealth is Surplus energy then Borrowing can only sensibly be expressed as Borrowing Future Energy Streams. Energy Budget have to be expressed qua Energy budgets a subjective value-based currency unit is simply not up to the job.

The Gulf in understanding and Speaking at crossed purposes inherent in maintaining the Old Financial artifices, and artifices are what they are, will maintain the ignorance of the majority of people. This is I think perfectly acceptable to those of an Elitist world view and Mindset.

Embodied Energy pricing and circular economy concepts along with DIstributive concepts of political economy and not re-distributive taxation and state-based centralised top-down control mechanisms are what is required. Vested interests are not going to listen anyway Tim, Afterall Turkeys do not vote for Christmas.

Finally, Interest charged on a dead medium is unsupportable by definition, this is the driver of the Growth requirement it’s the debt-based Financial system, and debt and taxation as a political control mechanism of the masses is something which again Elitist world views are more than comfortable with and simply do not wish to let go of.

Re-Blogged Comment awaiting Moderation

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2019/09/02/155-the-art-of-dark-sky-thinking/

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2019/10/13/156-actual-fantasy/

https://twitter.com/GrubStreetJorno/status/1183614641701871616

mentions “retired dilettante trained in analytic philosophy, but have researched this for 3 decades or so” . SO Steven 3 decades as a Dilettante it seems? Have you got a link to your 200o systems paper quoting Smil, I would like to read it.
Screenshot from 2019-10-15 09-20-22.png

https://t.co/nzks8Lf8js #156. Actual fantasy #GrubStreetJournal @StevenBKurtz #ActualFantasy #SEEDs #SEEDS #Web3 #OIP #IPFS #WebSEO #ConquestofDough #TheDeletantista https://t.co/gciC1e9jTb pic.twitter.com/CK0D1mQJRL— GrubStreetJournal (@GrubStreetJorno) October 15, 2019 https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Surplus Energy Economics

OUR URGENT NEED FOR RATIONAL ECONOMICS

Everyone knows the quotation, of course, which says that “when it gets serious, you have to lie”.

Actually, when it gets even more serious, we have to face the facts.

I’m indebted to Dutch rock music genius Arjen Lucassen for the observation that the counterpart to “virtual reality” is actual fantasy – and that’s where the world economy seems to be right now.

You may think it’s imminent, or you might believe that it still lies some distance in the future, but I’m pretty sure you know that we’re heading, inescapably, for “GFC II”, the much larger (and very different) sequel to the 2008 global financial crisis (GFC).

SEEDS 20 – the latest iteration of the Surplus Energy Economics Data System – has a new module which calculates the scale of exposure to “value destruction”. This exposure now stands at $320 trillion, compared with…

View original post 3,611 more words

59 thoughts on “#156. Actual fantasy #GrubStreetJournal @StevenBKurtz

  1. drtimmorgan
    on October 13, 2019 at 4:15 pm said:
    Hang on a minute – debt IS future wealth, if you’re the person to whom it is owed.

    If you owned £1m of gilts, and the government then said it was never going to pay up, crashing the price to zero, would you not feel just a bit poorer?

    rogerglewis
    on October 13, 2019 at 4:43 pm said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Tim a Claim on wealth does not necessarily represent Skin in the Game. How people feel about wealth or value is purely subjective. For Objective energy-based economics what is important is actually the Pigou Dalton principle, which is related to Status and taxation/re-distribution tolerance.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigou%E2%80%93Dalton_principle
    At its root, “status” is related to mating prospects, these are visceral matters of instinct, the Subjective issues around monetary value are far less problematical than Social re-ordering through perceived discriminatory re-distribution of relative status within civil society.
    Energy is a falsifiable measure the Variability and subjectivity of monetary “Values” are pseudoscientific, thats why the conflation is a contradiction of the claimed first principles of energy Economics, That’s just the way it is.
    Under a distributive monetary system based on Energy Credits and not Debt, the redistributive aspects of subjective earned monetary income are less acute and the process of a leveling out as posited by Proudhon in his theory and proposal for a State credit bank as argued with Bastiat is well worth reading both are available on my Blog and Conquest of Dough web site.

    Like

  2. drtimmorgan
    on October 13, 2019 at 5:52 pm said:
    Status is one of the many issues that I think we need to address as we go further into this. At various times, different metrics have determined status. Levi Strauss and others did interesting work on the status-signalling of foods, for example. At various times, too, ancestral lineage has had more status than wealth.

    These various indications of status have applied either in economically-static societies or in those where material prosperity has been growing. We have few (though there are some) examples of status markers in deteriorating economies.

    On the original point, though, cancelling debts does mean depriving those to whom the debts were owed. This is why, when debt burdens have become excessive in the past, the usual resort has been to inflation – creditors have been ‘repaid’, albeit in money of lesser or even of minimal worth.

    rogerglewis
    on October 13, 2019 at 6:06 pm said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    For the greater part of Human History in sedentary societies, the solution has been Jubilee, not Inflation. Inflations are a fairly modern innovation as is, of course, the secular State and Supra-National Government and Corporate monopoly Capital. Since John Law got his innovations adopted by the French court, there has been a considerable memory holing of the Science of Money ( Del-Mar and Zarlenga require mention).
    From the perspectives of Monetary History, the timeline goes back a long-Long way and feudalism and outright Slavery also enters the equation even in the relatively modern era. There is certainly a conversation to be had. Of Course, even the Work of Henry George, well known at the Fin De Cicle is all but forgotten after over Half a century of Hayekian and Chicago School Neo-Liberal monetarism and financialization.
    Regarding Usury, I consider Benthams in defence of Usury to be the point at which the Liberal lobby for Usury to have bamboozled the better judgment of more Conservative heads, overturning a couple of Millenia of religious and ethical thought. Bentham’s Treatise is well worth reading it is an un-requited invitation to Dialogue with Adam Smith who opposed usury.

    Like

    1. Steven B Kurtz
      on October 13, 2019 at 7:46 pm said:
      R.L. writes:
      “How people feel about wealth or value is purely subjective.”

      S.K.-That same inherent genetic drivers affecting status and mating affect ‘feelings’ and thoughts. All are assumed to be physical until *anything* non-physical can be demonstrated, in which case a Nobel is likely.

      R.L. -“For Objective energy-based economics what is important is actually the Pigou Dalton principle, which is related to Status and taxation/re-distribution tolerance.”

      S.K.- “important” to you? I suggest you look at Lotka and Odum’s work on the Maximum Power Principle. It isn’t an absolute law, but the vast majority of humans and other living systems follow it.
      see:
      https://www.ecologycenter.us/ecosystem-theory/the-maximum-power-principle.html

      R.L.- “Energy is a falsifiable measure the Variability and subjectivity of monetary “Values” are pseudoscientific,…”

      S.K.- Monetary values are determined by human actions in trade. This is for other currencies as well as for goods and services. Barter served (& still serves) the same purpose. Terms like pseudoscientific are normative. Tim is not conflating. You seem to have another axe to grind.

      Steven B Kurtz
      on October 14, 2019 at 4:17 am said:
      Netherland’s CB: Gold needed if system crash.

      https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/central-bank-issues-stunning-warning-if-entire-system-collapses-gold-will-be-needed-start

      Like

      1. rogerglewis
        on October 14, 2019 at 6:05 am said:
        Your comment is awaiting moderation.
        “All are assumed to be physical until *anything* non-physical can be demonstrated, in which case a Nobel is likely.”
        “Terms like pseudoscientific are normative. Tim is not conflating. You seem to have another axe to grind”.

        Steven, I suggest that it is perhaps you that have some sort of Axe to Grind.

        Regarding Physicality and the Materialism V Idealism dichotomy that you perceive of, I do not go in for such a dualism it does not affect my own Philosophical system.

        I use the Term Psuedo Scientific in a Popperian sense of Falsifiability. That is Truth Claims based upon Experimentation and repeatable predictions. SUbjective Human value relations are variable and subjective any such Metric claimed for them are both inductive, and circular in their basis and not repeatable by testable experiments as such they are Psuedo scientific within the terms defined.

        The points which I have made are contained and kept within the Terms within Tims excellent article.
        Tim and I have a difference of opinion with respect to how to get the energy Metric into the discourse on the Financial System that is all.

        Tim Says.
        ” That means that, whilst as purists we might prefer to set out our findings in calories, BTUs and joules, we have to talk in dollars, euros and yen if we’re to secure a hearing. It also means that we need models of the economy based firmly on energy principles.”

        Making a procrustean attempt to shoehorn Scientific energy-based concepts of a metrological system based upon Energy Budgets, into the meta-physics of the current FInancialised paradigm is in my view a fruitless exercise. And Tim and I have been discussing this from the very first comments I made on this Blog.

        Steven, you broke off from our separate discussion on other issues at my own blog, in reverence to Tims wishes expressed at the start of this thread I will not link to that here or indeed take the discussion in that direction. I have dealt with the relevant substantive points there. I will only say Electro Magnetism and action at a distance is not Physical yet is testable by experiment.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. #128: GFC II
        Posted on May 30, 2018
        THE ANATOMY OF THE NEXT CRASH
        rogerglewis on June 23, 2018 at 4:11 am said:
        https://www.peakprosperity.com/video/236/playlist/153/chapter-17c-energy-and-economy

        Chapter 17 from The Crash Course by Chris Martenson is an excellent summary of the Surplus Energy Problem There is an Excellent Video Presentation embedded in this Web Page.

        This Paper has some good population doubling reasoning. It is firmly in the Misanthropic Camp and not my cup of tea ( comparing humans to Cancerous Growth) In its defence it is giving me some comedy gold for the Misanthropic Characters In My Nove.

        http://www.drhern.com/pdfs/doubling.pdf

        Donald
        on June 23, 2018 at 6:22 am said:
        Hi – a good clear video. I see (from YouTube) that it was published in 2008. A great pity that no one took any notice.

        Donald
        on June 23, 2018 at 6:41 am said:
        A year old but Chris explains the folly of all the Fed’s money printing exercise and how it benefited the few. It was a mouth water exercise in creating yet more greed.

        Donald
        on June 23, 2018 at 6:41 am said:
        Sorry here’s the link

        Like

      3. rogerglewis on June 25, 2018 at 2:02 pm said:
        An interesting Video. Manning is certainly pretty certain of his own worldview and good luck to him.
        Mannings own interpretation of his experiences, including Hunting, which are not dissimilar to my Own do not necessarily lead to a sort of romantic yearning for a Hunter-Gatherer existence.
        The video is wide-ranging and a number of claims are made which are certainly highly debatable.
        Chiefly the claim that Agriculture is by definition Unsustainable, Manning does contradict himself on this point several times, Contradiction is I think a good thing all outcomes are not inevitable from the same set of starting assumptions, Manning for me is very the United States oriented in his Biases it is of course pretty obvious that the US is taking far more than its fair share from the Planet, its own systems of Government and Cultural mores are mercifully not prevalent in the rest of the world.
        How rigorously defendable Mannings position is remains to be seen. A monologue is not the best test of any hypothesis.
        https://ourworldindata.org/fertilizer-and-pesticides

        https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-and-changing-energy-sources#transitioning-economies-and-declining-energy-intensity

        http://www.ecn.nl/docs/library/report/1999/c99045.pdf

        These three links give some hard data on how much primary and secondary energy goes into Fertiliser and pesticide production, and also how they are actually declining both in terms of Energy consumption but also application.
        This Film King corn explains much of what is wrong with the US model of Agriculture and Why.

        Mannings addiction to the Superlative “Catastrophe” was for me a drawback in his central Thesis.
        He also says that Erlich was not wrong the Outcome was actually wrong not the prediction.
        All very well in Reality but does it work in Theory springs to mind.

        Just my 5 cents worth, I will not be putting my head between my knees and kissing my backside goodbye on the strength of Mannings clearly sincere convictions though.

        rogerglewis on June 25, 2018 at 2:06 pm said:
        King Corn Link not working this one does I think.

        Donald
        on June 25, 2018 at 2:35 pm said:
        The original King Corn film linked to a weird looking film – currently watching the second film with interest.

        Like

      4. rogerglewis
        on June 27, 2018 at 6:57 am said:
        Hi Donald, 15 years too late for what?
        Catastrophists are forever moving out the dates of their dire predictions.
        Personally, I do not think it is even a glass half full or glass half empty problem.
        Natural Gas is quickly going to surpass Oil as the primary fuel source for an interregnum period, Coal stands by as a Fisrts reserve to Gas, Both of which will keep the lights on beyond 2050, when Oil is slated to have been used beyond economic (whatever that is, usefulness.
        Meanwhile, in the youth team, we are bringing forward a promising crop of new players both in Attack ( generation ) and in Defence ( Storage) our Midfield strength in depth is also coming along very nicely with modern materials technology allowing for much more to be achieved with much less.
        The most likely causes of the demise of our species is Nuclear Holocaust, this is by no means a certainty most of humanity does not believe it is possible to win a Nuclear War, MAD is still mad and most of the Human species is not Mad,
        The other likely causes of our demises are Either Volcanic or Meteoric ( Asteroid ) collision events. There are plenty of sources of how likely and when these events are to occur, can we take precautionary measures against any of them, Maybe if we get lucky with the solutions we apply. I have been musing about how one might alleviate supervolcano activity? is it possible for instance to cause the magma pool to relieve horizontally rather than vertically avoiding at least the worse effects of a Volcanic winter? this could be a useful way of disposing of nuclear warheads? Shooting Eart impact Asteroids out of collision orbits could also be quite a good sport in the future.
        Then there are the biological threats from pandemics, The Bird Flu, and Ebola Scares, even AIDS has been mooted as the coup de grace for our species at various points in the recent past.
        Population levels slow down when infant mortality rates drop, and education levels increase with both an understanding of contraception and an incentive to use it naturally sees most people choosing to have smaller families, getting into the sociology and psychology of all of that is not necessary but google Hans Rosling and he has many lectures and ted talks on YouTube setting out the empirical evidence.
        What the Human Family faces is not a production problem or even an Energy problem it is a distribution problem. The distribution mechanisms of Debt based financialised Capitalism do not operate efficiently under current potentials for production and distribution, There are many flavours of Capitalism, the less Greed Centred ones tend to do better based on the evidence available in Capitalisms brief history.
        As a bit of light relief, this is a fun way of giving a hat tip to Bastiat’s petition of the Candlemakers.

        The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse have been with us since the first century AD, what are they and what do they signify?
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Apocalypse
        As empire prosperity
        “According to Edward Bishop Elliott’s interpretation, that the Four Horsemen represent a prophecy of the subsequent history of the Roman Empire, the white color of this horse signifies triumph, prosperity and health in the political Roman body. For the next 80 or 90 years succeeding the banishment of the apostle John to Patmos covering the successive reigns of the emperors Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian and the two Antonines (Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius), a golden age of prosperity, union, civil liberty and good government unstained with civil blood unfolded. The agents of this prosperity personified by the rider of the white horse are these five emperors wearing crowns that reigned with absolute authority and power under the guidance of virtue and wisdom, the armies being restrained by their firm and gentle hands.[6]:129–131,134

        This interpretation points out that the bow was preeminently a weapon of the inhabitants of the island of Crete and not of the Roman Empire in general. The Cretans were renowned for their archery skills. The significance of the rider of the white horse holding a bow indicates the place of origin of the line of emperors ruling during this time. This group of emperors can be classed together under one and the same head and family whose origins were from Crete.[6]:140,142–144

        According to this interpretation, this period in Roman history, remarkable, both at its commencement and at its close, illustrated the glory of the empire where its limits were extended, though not without occasional wars, which were always uniformly triumphant and successful on the frontiers. The triumphs of the Emperor Trajan, a Roman Alexander, added to the empire Dacia, Armenia, Mesopotamia and other provinces during the course of the first 20 years of the period, which deepened the impression on the minds of the barbarians of the invincibility of the Roman Empire. Roman war progressed triumphantly into the invader’s own territory, and the Parthian war was successfully ended by the total overthrow of those people. Roman conquest is demonstrated even in the most mighty of these wars, the Marcomannic succession of victories under the second Antonine unleashed on the German barbarians, driven into their forests and reduced to Roman submission.[6]:131–133” From Wikipedia.

        Looking back to Rome and to the previous Hegemonic Empires, and subsequent ones what can we learn regarding our present local difficulties.

        Apparently, Gandhi said there is enough provided by nature in this world to satisfy all needs but there will never be enough to satisfy human greed.

        The answer to that observation is surely to incentivise and reward moderation and cease celebrating and promoting Greed?

        Ruskin Said this regarding Wealth.

        “The whole question, therefore, respecting not only the
        advantage, but even the quantity, of national wealth, resolves
        itself finally into one of abstract justice. It is impossible to
        conclude, of any given mass of acquired wealth, merely by the
        fact of its existence, whether it signifies good or evil to the
        nation in the midst of which it exists. Its real value depends on
        the moral sign attached to it, just as sternly as that of a
        mathematical quantity depends on the algebraical sign attached to
        it. Any given accumulation of commercial wealth may be
        indicative, on the one hand, of faithful industries, progressive
        energies, and productive ingenuities: or, on the other, it may be
        indicative of mortal luxury, merciless tyranny, ruinous chicane.
        Some treasures are heavy with human tears, as an ill-stored
        harvest with untimely rain; and some gold is brighter in sunshine
        than it is in substance.” Ruskin, Unto this Last, Veins of wealth.

        https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2019/01/12/ruskins-critique-of-classical-political-economy-2/

        Like

      5. mentions

        @DavidGolemXIV @financialeyes @JoeBlob20 The Intervention of Dennet is very funny. #TheScienceDelusion #RupertSheldrake
        mentions #156 #ActualFantasy #SEEDS #SurplusEnergyEcomomicsSystem #DrTimMorgan
        #156. Actual fantasy
        Reblogged on WordPress.com
        https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2019/10/13/156-actual-fantasy/comment-page-1/#comment-6176
        mentions

        #156 #ActualFantasy #SEEDS #SurplusEnergyEcomomicsSystem #DrTimMorgan
        #156. Actual fantasy
        Reblogged on WordPress.com
        https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2019/10/13/156-actual-fantasy/comment-page-1/#comment-6176

        mentions

        Like

      6. Steven B Kurtz
        on October 14, 2019 at 1:02 pm said:
        R.L.:
        Your blog applauds people like Nietzsche and Sheldrake. That is not economics. It is hocus-pocus. That’s why I ceased engaging you there.

        Ask The American Physical Society, The AAAS, The Royal Society, etc. if “Electro Magnetism and action at a distance is non-physical” Energies we don’t understand are not automatically placed in the realm of deities or woo.

        Please go to the Nobel Committee with your imaginary ontological categories! Repeatedly rewinding your tape from your first post on Tim’s blog indicates you are a one trick pony who never gives up.

        Metaphysics is an examination of the unknown; that is an oxymoron. As I posted prior to this response, subjectivity is the result of the embodied past of all living systems including you. You can’t help it, so I’ll not criticize you again for mumbo-jumbo.

        I am not the only respondent who is fed up with proselytizing one’s own blog and theories here. I’m surprised Tim permits you repeatedly use his blog to pump your creations. You have your own blog to do that.

        Reply To Steven Kurz From Roger Lewis.

        Steven, It seems so to you I am Sure, See Epictetus’s Enheridion Clause 42 for details.

        Tim Mentions the numbers of people reading his Blog, my efforts to Tweet and Link an help with Web SEO for Tims Blog will have been significant in making Tims Blog Discoverable.

        For my own Blog, it is my notebook that is all I could not care less if it is read or not, I am happy to engage or not I respect the rights of others to make up their own mind and make their own arguments.
        https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2019/10/13/156-actual-fantasy/comment-page-1/?unapproved=15126&moderation-hash=bf77acca2cf031fa3eccff4b3310368e#comment-15126

        Like

    2. Timmorgan
      on October 14, 2019 at 9:54 am said:
      Here’s a line of thinking which I hope you’ll take on board.

      Conventional, money-fixated economic interpretation has failed us, with each new failure compounding the ones before it. The next such failure could be a real horror-show.

      So, in the public interest, we need to urge the case for replacing it with something more scientific – which, for me, means energy-based interpretation.

      This requires us to participate in the debate, as logically and as forcefully as we can.

      We’re only going to make progress if we put our case in terms to which the ‘arbiters’ of the debate – governments, businesses, opinion-influencers – can relate. That means expressing our case in the financial language understood by participants.

      If we say that somebody is ‘£xxx worse off, and has £xxx more debt’, participants can relate to this. Saying that they’re ‘xxx BTUs poorer’ would marginalize what we’re trying to do.

      This is also why we need the maximum number of people to engage – it’s both humbling and encouraging that close to 46,000 different people visited this site last year – and participation will not be encouraged by long comments lacking in brevity and relevance.

      Like

    3. rogerglewis
      on October 14, 2019 at 10:37 am said:
      Hi, Tim, I agree with you,

      “We’re only going to make progress if we put our case in terms to which the ‘arbiters’ of the debate – governments, businesses, opinion-influencers – can relate. That means expressing our case in the financial language understood by participants.

      If we say that somebody is ‘£xxx worse off, and has £xxx more debt’, participants can relate to this. Saying that they’re ‘xxx BTUs poorer’ would marginalize what we’re trying to do.”

      I would after setting out the terms of reference define the energy Budget in relation to a Stock and flow model of Energy reserves, generation capacity and realistic Every Big that helps as per Prof Sir David MacKays With Hot Air.

      https://blogs.oracle.com/utilities/what-does-a-kwh-really-mean-to-consumers

      The Oracle link was the reasoning I used to convert the world FInance economy into a KWH basis
      to which I have linked before.

      Like

    4. Quite right too @houtskool

      http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/?s=Odious+debt&submit.x=0&submit.y=0

      I think David Malone has used the Term in several of his Blogs on Greece, In fact I seem to recall seeing your own comments there too and at Off Guardian.

      Now the claimed Systems thinkers amongst us will be familiar with the concept of Wicked Problems and Convergent and divergent problems.

      The Scientific method is great for Convergent Soluble sort and not so good for the Divergent Wicked Sort.

      View at Medium.com

      drtimmorgan
      on March 9, 2018 at 8:40 am
      Roger
      Can I ask, politely, why you post so many links here? Speaking personally, I don’t have the time to follow them up, though of course others may. I’m pretty busy and have to plan prettycarefully.
      houtskool
      on March 9, 2018 at 9:36 pm
      Current seeds numbers should tell us enough about where we are heading.
      We have numbers and we have words. Mixing up those doesn’t add anything to the conclusion.
      Its like putting a ‘price’ on gold. In my opinion, dear doc, you can skip efforts putting numbers on words and let the blog figure it out.
      rogerglewis
      on March 10, 2018 at 5:33 am
      The analysis regarding EROEI and its effect on prosperity potential is one thing, Continuing Economic models are failing for other reasons in addition to available cheaply priced Energy. ( Crony Capitalism is the buzz term I believe)
      Placing all of ones’ analytical ammo into the seeds weapon would be a strategic mistake.
      Another mistake is accepting the starting assumptions and definitions moulded in the Growth Paradigm and applying them to a post-growth paradigm.
      Finally, Seeds is not looking at the embodied energy question which gets very interesting when one considers re-cycling and circular economy, this question gets into use models over ownership models, this speaks to efficiency of energy use and not to some ideological measure of fairness or equality, or indeed some subjective voodoo related to the time value of money.
      Google Procrustes.

      http://2050-calculator-tool.decc.gov.uk/#/calculator

      @StevenKurz 30 year veteran oof Deletantism, The “delatantista” you see what I did there?

      Now, Stephen, “Mr Deletantista” this is by way of demonstration, refining and going into the granularity of a problem over a long period of time is what leads to progress that is what the scientific Method and Critical Thought has gifted us down the millennia. The search for absolutes and the Woo you read into my own enquiries and efforts to express questions is in fact by my own Lights quite the opposite it is fAITHFULL TO THE METHOD OF ENQUIRY and rational reasoned testing of hypothesis and following the Example of Robert the Bruce and the spider as opposed to Sisyphus

      of course, the allegory of the cave leads one to meet with the shackled chained both to each other and the shadows cast upon the wall.

      https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2019/01/12/posthumous-guest-post-jud-evans-rip-jud-lays-out-his-epistemological-position-in-all-its-glory-repost-from-june-2013-updated-links-to-juds-writings-and-intellectual-legacy-4/
      Posthumous Guest Post. Jud Evans (RIP).Jud Lays out His epistemological Position in all its glory. (Repost from June 2013, updated links to Juds writings and intellectual legacy)

      Like

  3. drtimmorgan
    on October 13, 2019 at 6:14 pm said:
    Usury, forbidden to this day by Islam, was once considered to be prohibited by Christianity, too. Jesus did, after all, throw the money-changers out of the temple.

    In fifteenth century England, it carried the death penalty. Henry VIII relaxed this, such that usury was only punishable by death if interest in excess of 10% was charged. Importantly, though, it remained impossible to enforce debt obligations using the law – because you couldn’t expect the courts to uphold a contract which was itself unlawful.

    rogerglewis
    on October 13, 2019 at 6:32 pm said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Hi Tim, This is a Post dating back to the Greek Crisis and is called The Irony of reading Plutarch, who wrote about Solon’s reforms.
    https://whenthecrisishitthefan.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/the-irony-of-reading-plutarch/

    Sec. II. Why pay court to the banker or trader? Borrow from your own table. You have cups, silver dishes, pots and pans. Use them in your need. Beautiful Aulis or Tenedos will furnish you with earthenware instead, purer than silver, for they will not smell strongly and unpleasantly of interest, a kind of rust that daily soils your sumptuousness, nor will they remind you of the calends and the new moon, which, though the most holy of days, the money-lenders make ill-omened and hateful. For those who instead of selling them put their goods out at pawn cannot be saved even by Zeus the Protector of Property: they are ashamed to sell, they are not ashamed to pay interest on their goods when out at pawn.

    Its great Stuff.

    Like

  4. We must now take precautions to prevent you from being embarrassed by something in which the ignorant majority is at fault for lack of proper consideration, and so from supposing with them, that man has not been created truly good simply because he is able to do evil. … If you reconsider this matter carefully and force your mind to apply a more acute understanding to it, it will be revealed to you that man’s status is better and higher for the very reason for which it is thought to be inferior: it is on this choice between two ways, on this freedom to choose either alternative, that the glory of the rational mind is based, it is in this that the whole honor of our nature consists, it is from this that its dignity is derived.
    Pelagius
    Pelagius (c. 390-418) was an Irish or British ascetic moralist, who became well known throughout the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity. He was declared a heretic by the Council of Carthage. His doctrine became known as Pelagianism.

    Like

  5. drtimmorgan
    on October 14, 2019 at 9:54 am said:
    Here’s a line of thinking which I hope you’ll take on board.

    Conventional, money-fixated economic interpretation has failed us, with each new failure compounding the ones before it. The next such failure could be a real horror-show.

    So, in the public interest, we need to urge the case for replacing it with something more scientific – which, for me, means energy-based interpretation.

    This requires us to participate in the debate, as logically and as forcefully as we can.

    We’re only going to make progress if we put our case in terms to which the ‘arbiters’ of the debate – governments, businesses, opinion-influencers – can relate. That means expressing our case in the financial language understood by participants.

    If we say that somebody is ‘£xxx worse off, and has £xxx more debt’, participants can relate to this. Saying that they’re ‘xxx BTUs poorer’ would marginalize what we’re trying to do.

    This is also why we need the maximum number of people to engage – it’s both humbling and encouraging that close to 46,000 different people visited this site last year – and participation will not be encouraged by long comments lacking in brevity and relevance.

    rogerglewis
    on October 14, 2019 at 10:37 am said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Hi, Tim, I agree with you,

    “We’re only going to make progress if we put our case in terms to which the ‘arbiters’ of the debate – governments, businesses, opinion-influencers – can relate. That means expressing our case in the financial language understood by participants.

    If we say that somebody is ‘£xxx worse off, and has £xxx more debt’, participants can relate to this. Saying that they’re ‘xxx BTUs poorer’ would marginalize what we’re trying to do.”

    I would after setting out the terms of reference define the energy Budget in relation to a Stock and flow model of Energy reserves, generation capacity and realistic Every Big that helps as per Prof Sir David MacKays With Hot Air.

    https://blogs.oracle.com/utilities/what-does-a-kwh-really-mean-to-consumers

    The Oracle link was the reasoning I used to convert the world FInance economy into a KWH basis
    to which I have linked before.

    Like

  6. Let’s start at home. The average American home uses 10,932 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity per year, or an average of 30 kWh per day. Surprisingly, the electric vehicle parked in the garage uses very little electricity by comparison–approximately 2,520 kWh annually, less than that required for the electric water heater in the basement.

    Out in the day-to-day world, electricity use ramps up considerably:

    The average 100,000-square-foot office building in the U.S. uses approximately 2 million kWh of electricity per year, or 20 kWh per square foot of space.
    Quick service (“fast food”) restaurants in the U.S. are real energy hogs, burning through an average of 81 kWh of electricity per square foot every year.
    U.S. grocery stores require a massive amount of electricity, as well, with 66 percent of the average 52.5 kWh used annually going to feed lighting and refrigeration alone.
    But what does that really mean? How can we normalize a measurement of kilowatt hours for the average consumer? This has been the challenge utilities have been tackling since the introduction of smart meters and, in some areas, time-of-use prices.

    My mother is retired, and is living on a fixed income in Ontario, Canada, which has time-of-use electricity prices set by the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) twice a year. She is in the minority of electricity consumers: she makes a regular habit of monitoring the way she uses electricity. Her on-peak electricity usage is nearly nil, except in winter, when she relies upon electric heat. (Don’t visit her in the winter without wearing a heavy sweater indoors, though.) She takes her showers and washes and dries her laundry in off-peak hours. It’s a personal challenge for her each month to see how low she can bring her energy bill.

    A kilowatt hour is not a familiar unit of measurement, at least not like the inch or the centimeter, the mile or the kilometer, in everyday life. For my mother, a kilowatt hour is a unit of currency. She knows that, until October 31 when the rates change, one kWh of electricity used in off-peak hours costs her 8.7 cents. Mid-peak usage costs her 13.2 cents per kWh, and on-peak use costs her 18 cents per kWh.

    But my mother is an anomaly. Many consumers aren’t as conscious of their use, or the price of that usage. So, let’s put the kWh into perspective.

    In the average home, one kWh of electricity means the ability to:

    watch 10 hours of television,
    wash 12 pounds of laundry,
    cook a hot breakfast for 4 people,
    listen to 20 hours of radio, or
    use the computer for 5 to 10 hours.
    According to The World Factbook, the United States alone–and it’s the second-largest consumer of electricity in the world, behind China–consumes 3.832 trillion kWh of electricity annually. To break that down, imagine cooking breakfast for 15.3 trillion friends (or roughly 2,000 times the world’s population), or doing 46 trillion pounds of laundry. That’s how much electricity the United States consumes in a year.

    Using my mother’s math, if the U.S. used all of that electricity in off-peak hours (at my mother’s OEB rates), it would cost $333.384 billion. On peak? That’s a dollar figure you don’t even want to imagine.

    Utilities today collect massive amounts of data–both usage data from smart meters and data from other sensors throughout the grid–but they do not always have the means to analyze it and turn it into actionable business intelligence, both for their own operational efficiency and for the benefit of their customers. Oracle Utilities is working to ensure utilities have the ability to analyze their data more quickly, and in a more meaningful way, with its new release of Oracle Utilities Analytics Cloud Service and Oracle Utilities Work and Asset Management Analytics. For more information, click here.

    Be the first to comment
    Comments ( 0 )

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Matt on October 14, 2019 at 4:50 am said:
    I’ve been reading a lot of Roger Pielke Jr’s stuff recently and it introduced me the the Kaya Identity,

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaya_identity

    when you talk of ‘decoupling’ you’re referring to trying to reduce the energy intensity of GDP ?

    and by ‘transition’ you mean reducing the carbon footprint of energy by rapidly expanding renewables?

    I’m trying to use the Kaya Identity to get a grasp of the overall picture whilst also suspecting it might have been guiding a lot of policy over the last few decades,

    I’m wondering if there’s been extreme policy emphasis on decoupling, some genuine but mostly fake, in an attempt to avoid the challenge/need to transition,

    writing successful globally marketable IP like Microsoft Windows or Harry Potter novels is real decoupling,
    dodgy financial instruments and faking GDP with spending huge amounts of borrowed money is fake decoupling,
    also deindustrialising and switching to a consumer/service economy where you smuggle the carbon into your economy embedded in imported goods is also fake decoupling, (just moving the carbon emitting to the exporting country)

    the one thing we’re just not doing enough of is ‘transitioning’ so we’ve got clean energy we can safely use to power the real economy and generate authentic prosperity?

    you’re prognosis is ‘they’ will probably push the fake decoupling to new limits in response to the next crash in an attempt to continue to ignore the need to transition to an energy source we can use without frying all life on earth?

    also we still don’t have a viable alternative to fossil fuels on the scale of current energy consumption?

    Reply ↓

    drtimmorgan
    on October 14, 2019 at 6:33 am said:
    First of all, yes, “decoupling” does mean growing the economy without using more energy. A recent report from the European Environmental Bureau debunked this, saying the arguments supporting it are “a haystack without a needle”.

    “Transition” means replacing climate-harming fossil fuels with renewables. Two considerations make like-for-like replacement implausible.

    One of these is sheer scale. I’ve seen a report stating that, to do this by 2050 using wind power, we’d need to install 1,500 turbines, covering 300 sq miles, every day between now and 2050. Alternatively, we could build three new nuclear power stations every two days.

    The second is intermittency. In a partially-renewables system, you can use alternatives when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow. In a wholly- or mostly-renewables situation, you would need enormous battery back-up. It’s been calculated that this would cost 10x the cost of installing the capacity itself.

    Put these two together and ‘saving the planet’ is likely to require de-growth. It means that promises of “sustainable growth” are false.

    rogerglewis
    on October 14, 2019 at 7:39 am said:

    This Pelke Talk is excellent.

    Like

  8. “Money”, by Philip Larkin
    Quarterly, is it, money reproaches me:
    ‘Why do you let me lie here wastefully?
    I am all you never had of goods and sex.
    You could get them still by writing a few cheques.’
    So I look at others, what they do with theirs:
    They certainly don’t keep it upstairs.
    By now they’ve a second house and car and wife:
    Clearly money has something to do with life
    —In fact, they’ve a lot in common, if you enquire:
    You can’t put off being young until you retire,
    And however you bank your screw, the money you save
    Won’t in the end buy you more than a shave.
    I listen to money singing. It’s like looking down
    From long french windows at a provincial town,
    The slums, the canal, the churches ornate and mad
    In the evening sun. It is intensely sad.

    a very good Chris Hedges piece on Truthdig,
    The Age of Radical Evil.
    https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-age-of-radical-evil/

    “These architects of radical evil extract the coal, oil and gas, poisoning our air, soil and water, while demanding huge taxpayer subsidies and blocking the urgent transition to renewable energy. ”

    “Corporate culture serves a faceless system. It is, as Hannah Arendt wrote, “the rule of nobody and for this very reason perhaps the least human and most cruel form of rulership.” It will stop at nothing. Anyone or any movement that attempts to impede their profits will be targeted for obliteration. ”

    But who are those who resist? Where do they come from? What historical, social and cultural forces created them?

    They too are familiar. They are Denmark Vesey, Nat Turner, John Brown, Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass. They are Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse and Chief Joseph. They are Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony and Emma Goldman. They are “Big Bill” Haywood, Joe Hill and Eugene V. Debs. They are Woody Guthrie, Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Ella Baker and Fannie Lou Hamer. They are Andrea Dworkin and Caesar Chavez. They are those who from the beginning fought back, often to be defeated by this radical evil but knowing they were called to defy it, even at the cost of their own reputations, financial security, social standing and sometimes their lives.

    Like

  9. rogerglewis on October 13, 2019 at 3:24 pm said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Reblogged this on Not The Grub Street Journal and commented:
    Re-Blogged Comment awaiting Moderation

    rogerglewis on October 17, 2019 at 9:50 am said:
    “Money”, by Philip Larkin
    Quarterly, is it, money reproaches me:
    ‘Why do you let me lie here wastefully?
    I am all you never had of goods and sex.
    You could get them still by writing a few cheques.’
    So I look at others, what they do with theirs:
    They certainly don’t keep it upstairs.
    By now they’ve a second house and car and wife:
    Clearly money has something to do with life
    —In fact, they’ve a lot in common, if you enquire:
    You can’t put off being young until you retire,
    And however you bank your screw, the money you save
    Won’t in the end buy you more than a shave.
    I listen to money singing. It’s like looking down
    From long french windows at a provincial town,
    The slums, the canal, the churches ornate and mad
    In the evening sun. It is intensely sad.

    a very good Chris Hedges piece on Truthdig,
    The Age of Radical Evil.
    https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-age-of-radical-evil/

    “These architects of radical evil extract the coal, oil and gas, poisoning our air, soil and water, while demanding huge taxpayer subsidies and blocking the urgent transition to renewable energy. ”

    “Corporate culture serves a faceless system. It is, as Hannah Arendt wrote, “the rule of nobody and for this very reason perhaps the least human and most cruel form of rulership.” It will stop at nothing. Anyone or any movement that attempts to impede their profits will be targeted for obliteration. ”

    But who are those who resist? Where do they come from? What historical, social and cultural forces created them?

    They too are familiar. They are Denmark Vesey, Nat Turner, John Brown, Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass. They are Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse and Chief Joseph. They are Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony and Emma Goldman. They are “Big Bill” Haywood, Joe Hill and Eugene V. Debs. They are Woody Guthrie, Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Ella Baker and Fannie Lou Hamer. They are Andrea Dworkin and Caesar Chavez. They are those who from the beginning fought back, often to be defeated by this radical evil but knowing they were called to defy it, even at the cost of their own reputations, financial security, social standing and sometimes their lives.

    Like

    1. Steven B Kurtz
      on October 17, 2019 at 3:38 pm said:
      While many may agree with your declaration and elucidation of evil, those are normative evaluations. The Bell Curve has a greed/power tail as well as a voluntary simplicity one. The drivers are biological. Societal feedback can work to manage the situation, and it is easier in groups of a few hundred including kids and the elderly than in those of tens of thousands and larger. Group responsibility is operative in social mammals. Feedback and knowledge is diluted by scale.

      rogerglewis
      on October 17, 2019 at 8:04 pm said:
      Your comment is awaiting moderation.
      Rogerglewis
      on October 17, 2019 at 8:04 pm said:
      Your comment is awaiting moderation.
      It is not my elucidation it is Chris Hedges. I have actually made my own disagreements with a few particularly the Climate narrative aspects of the Hedges article. I have not linked to it here ( my blog that is) Frankly STeven I am rather fed up with your straw-manning me. I am still waiting for the paper you say you published in 2000. The debate here is limited by people such as yourself behaving in all the ways you accuse others of, Our exchanges have been less than illuminating for me , that the feeling is mutual I do not doubt, but do stop the pathetic straw-manning it is rather tedious.

      Like

  10. drtimmorgan on October 18, 2019 at 10:17 am said:

    Guidelines for commenting

    We’ve had some healthy discussion here about what is and what isn’t acceptable comment. Obviously, we want the maximum of discussion here. But we don’t want the experience of the many undermined by a minority.

    So – and this itself, of course, is up for discussion – I’m trialling an approach which I call ‘two gates, a filter and a request’.

    The two gates to be navigated are:

    – Relevance to energy, economics and finance

    – Reasonable brevity

    The filter is courtesy and respect for others’ points of view. The slogan for this, borrowed from sport, is “play the ball, not the man”.

    So it’s fine to say to someone that “your argument is idiotic”

    But it’s not fine to say “you are an idiot”.

    Finally, the request is that you don’t post a disproportionately large number of comments, insert too many links, or include too many ‘additions’ (such as video clips).

    The response to comments breaching these guidelines is review. This isn’t the same as a ban or block. Instead, anyone whose comment breaches these guidelines will have his or her future comments moderated – but any comments which don’t breach these guidelines will still be approved in moderation.

    Reply ↓

    rogerglewis
    on October 18, 2019 at 11:02 am said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Hello Tim,
    All of my posts have been moderated here for a long time when Links are included I know it is possible on WordPress to hold in moderation any posts with links or with N no of links according to the Blogger’s own preference.
    If I post both briefly and on point, my posts are still moderated, I do not like it but I value the discourse here more than my dislike of the treatment afforded vis moderation. Your house your rules afterall “An English Mans Blog is his castle”,
    Or are you like me a Welshman?

    As I often Re-Blog your posts and where I find that I wish to take issue or expand on limitations I consider in their reference points I have taken to simply expanding a dialogue in the comments or at the bottom of my own re-blogged post.

    “”So it’s fine to say to someone that “your argument is idiotic”

    But it’s not fine to say “you are an idiot”.

    Really? this is stretching it IMO, my last Comment complaining of regular straw-manning is still in moderation, it is not discourteous but makes a valid point.

    Best wishes
    Roger

    Like

  11. drtimmorgan
    on October 18, 2019 at 5:06 pm said:
    Roger, you have posted numerous comments linking to the same site, presumably your own. If you’ll refrain from doing that for a period, that would be helpful.

    rogerglewis
    on October 19, 2019 at 7:40 am said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Roger, you have posted numerous comments linking to the same site, presumably your own. If you’ll refrain from doing that for a period, that would be helpful.”

    Hi Tim, I have also been studying the monetary system and particularly Energy Economics for quite a long time, Soddy’s Work and also the Work of Technocracy back in the 1930’s was alive to the point. As such when I link to my own Blog it is to the full extent of the references I have made to those questions.

    The Internet is about Links, Hyper text Transfer Protocol .(HTTP) and ( “URL’s )(Uniform Resource Locator’s) is a way of addressing Meta data and searching for needles in haystacks and for attribution.
    I also make video and link to those, Search engine optimisation is very much driven by link backs and cross-references and my linking as well as providing source material is designed to bring traffic back to this Blog.

    Strawmanning of argumentation is a ubiquitous feature of the internet as is forum sliding and de-platforming both subtle covert and overt. All these things are relevant to Media outlets that challenge established Narratives.
    Mark Carney’s recent sermons on Net Zero Carbon and punishment for those who refuse to buy into the narrative and the ( Carbon Credits) and Yannis Varafoukis’s recent Project Syndicate Article on The IBS adopting Libra the CryptoCurrency are all relevant to both the core subject of this Blog but also the context of the political economy and geopolitical context.

    My own blog is linked to my WordPress avatar and it is one which I do link to often but on subjects in which I claim, considerable expertise but not a monopoly.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.