Lately I have been thinking about different ways of understanding economics. Seriously, I have been spending hours sitting around and pondering this. And I think I have found something there.
Did you see the second part of the new Sherlock Holmes movies? Do you remember that scene at the beginning where he shows Whatson his “spider net”? For everybody who hasn’t seen it, Sherlock has a tiny room with newspaper articles, photographies and all that stuff pinned to the walls. Every single thing is connected seemingly randomly with red strings so there is an enormous net spanning the hole room. Now lets change this. What if this room is the world, and every single newspaper article is a human, a company, a country or any other “wallets”. And those strings are the connections of money and products between the people. Some strings are thicker because a company bought another one for a few billion, some are extremely thin because somebody bought a cup of coffee for two dollars at a cafe. Everybody is dependent on everybody else, it is almost impossible to cut all strings connecting us to others. That is the reason why economic disasters is not local, everybody is going to notice it. But now, our money is not very much more then human work. We are not paying for resources, nature is free. So what are we paying with. Currency’s are not very much else then a measure for work. So its energie. We are basically dealing with sweat and headaches, there isn’t very much of a difference. But this energie is always the same. Physics told us a closed system always has constant energie. The energie we spend goes all around the earth through thousands of hands and eventually back to you. It is an endless circle. But then you may bring up, why is there economic growth? Ask Ray Buttler, it is automisation. Human work is being worth the same, but you need less human work if a robot does it. And there is another thing. Why was our last economic crisis so bad? It is simple. If the flow of money stops everything is worth nothing, because if we stop spending money, somewhere productions will be reduced, there will be less human work spent into our system. And this can spiral down until there is no money spent anymore. People want safety, but keeping your money will actually endanger it. This is extremely complicated, but until now I could explain anything that came to my mind except for wall street, but that is strange anyway. What I want to say, everybody is in twined in our current system, it is an enormous web, with bigger and smaller centers, small branched leading of everywhere going to other centers. It is a giant flow of energie going round and round. Rich are not evil, they are only places where the money is bundled and spent in bigger amounts to go back and be split up. Automisation is not stealing jobs, it actually only changes the places where people are needed.
So, is this completely foolish, are there any problems, do you like it, did I explain it good enough? I really would like to have any feedback on this, especially criticism. I am really excited about this and just needed go share it with you guys.
@viner-cent, I guess you are making a strong argument. In a sense this system is designed for people that think they know which is needed. So basically the corporate spiderweb offers something they think people need, they basically invest in there dreams so they become your dreams.
The problem at that point becomes a conflict while people become older and are less incline to accept certain dreams,- investments of corporates with thicker lines. This becomes a circle of corporates, thicker lines wanting you to follow them.
We as people empower corporates and there behind the scenes thicker lines for them to steer the energy of what they think we need, we work to help the thicker lines become thicker in a sense,
what’s your take on this?
@viner-cent, Check out this fascinating info graphic and short vido at the bottom there are other selections to check out below that . The economy will become a lot clearer. There’s one more I’ll send you when i find it . one place to take a pause in this one is we you’ve scroll down to the one trillion graphic look at it and imagine what 2 trillion looks like. what you will be seeing is the combined total wealth of just 400 individuals Americas richest. I say that not to complain. It’s just one of those mind boggling things especially when you learn that that amount is the same combined wealth of 150 million people on the opposite end. These facts can be verified at the Forbes website. Let me know what you think?
@spiraltouch True, peoples dreams need so much investment beforehands to be realized so only big companys can visualize them. So companys need to know what people want. And this is being tryed to filter out the companys that dont offer what people want by competition. But there is the problem with monopoles, f. E. apple, microsoft (they failed what most people wanted with windows 8) and many other companys. So if a corpation knows what people want it is getting stronger and stronger and either ruins or buyes any competitors… at least thats how much I understand your post (sorry, Im no native speaker)
@i4cim2b That is stuff I love, people who visualize numbers. It is impressing, actually its scary that the US has such an enormous debt… That is possibly one time going to collapse and we will have a giant problem as one of my giant knots has disapered… Debt is never good, especially at these rates
@viner-cent, did you get what I was saying about the page that show the 1 trillion dollars and how that enormous field of money is the private property belonging to only 200 individuals. I mean they don’t spend it and every year it gets bigger
@i4cim2b, That didn’t make economics clearer. It just made the debt of America visually understandable. I’d say a supply and demand chart would be the best thing to teach him economics.
@viner-cent, You did an okay job of explaining your theory. Just try and indent and separate into paragraphs next time. I am a little confused though. Are you just trying to explain that humans are on some form of grid and that currency is what connects us?
@motorik oh seriously, you would need extremely intelligent people to exploit or manoeuvre economics, and most politicians are pretty dumb around here.
@i4cim2b That is somehow bad. I guess they have so much money they cant even spend it. Lets hope they have many kids to be spreading it.
@kyle Sorry about that, Ive got a better version but its in German so meh, I just kind of started to translate it. Not really, Ive been anoyed about all the people saying “uuh, economics only exploit the poor and help the rich” and kind of wanted to prove them wrong. Because, something needs to be good about it, and seriously, with our demand of luxury we would be screwed without them. So basically I had this idea and didn’t manage to prove myself wrong, wich is very unusual. So I needed the opinion of other people. So if it isn’t absolute bullshit Ill make a better version of it. Oh yeah, I know about the theoretic stuff with the supply and demand, the prize is supposed to be the perfect point of supply meeting demand, although it rarely works like that.
@viner-cent, It’s not too hard to manipulate economics if you have money. Insider trading and mass pump and dumps can really do a number to markets.
The problem with economics is there is mass exploitation. Actually much of the world is exploited for labor and resources. I can’t even promise that the computer I am typing on was made for a fair wage in China due to their regulations.
It’s not economics that exploits the poor it’s people. I think what you might be trying to argue is for capitalism? That capitalism isn’t a bad system that only exploits the poor and provides for the rich and that it can’t all be bad. Well, if so, you’re right. It isn’t all bad, but that is like every economic system. It’s usually the governments that use them that do the most harm.
@kyle, I think the main problem really are people. Every single one of us. We could force brands to produce fairly, but we don’t. As soon as we pressure big brands to produce fairly and it still doesn’t work, then we can blame governments, but not before that. There are very few projekts of “fair trade” technic stuff, but they cant make a large array of products as they are to small. The interesting thing is that it doesn’t really cost a lot of money to pay people in other countries fairly because of the west-east drop in currency.
Oh yeah, you are right about the capitalism point, I think it is until now the best system we came up with.