Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘money

Money is Not neutral, it is not naked and it is colorful

House-Money effect

Note: A re-edit of a post of 2014 “Money is not neutral, it is not naked and it is colorful”

Do you think money is just money?

Are cash money, checks, traveler checks, stocks, bonds… equivalent?

Is the money you saved from hard work equivalent in value from what you find in the street?

Is money inherited similar in value from hard work earning?

Which kind of money you tend to spend quickly, swiftly and on unnecessary items?

Does the emotional shroud adds value to money?

Does money earned in a lottery ticket change your decisions when compared to hard earned money?

Which kinds of money gives you this urge to take a postponed long vacation? Or to improve your property?

Suppose you won $1,000 on a roulette game and then lost it. How great is your regret and suffering? I guess it won’t last long compared to hard earned saving.

For the same expected value, which money you prefer: cash money, checks, traveler checks, stocks, bonds, inheritance, lottery…?

Here is an experiment:

Two groups are randomly selected. Group A is given $30 in cash and then asked to bet: You win $9 if head or lose $9 if tail in a coin toss.

Group B is not offered any money. The subjects are told that they will receive $30 or take part in a coin tossing. The subject win $39 if head or $21 if tail.

Which group felt incited to gamble? 70% of Group A gambled compare to 43% in group B. Why?

The expected value is the same, but group A got readily in hand $30?

Marketing strategists expect to benefit from your sheer exuberance by rewarding you with upfront cash money if you apply to their programs (credit cards, airlines, phone companies…).

Eventually, you’ll quickly spend the money and accrue exorbitant interest rates on your credit card.

Does the term “added value” is of purely a monetary connotation?

Do you think that investment in poorer countries for vast stretch of lands to grow monocultures that does Not benefit the people is of any added value? Like growing roses or cereals that do Not constitute the stipend of the people, after burning a deforesting forests?

Do you think investing in exploiting oil, gas, and minerals in poorer countries is of any added values for the people in poor countries?

Without proper control, weak governments, and not standards the people are left with totally degraded environment that nothing can live or be recovered, and health issues that decimate the living creatures and man.

Are you a writer? Where the money comes from?

Why it’s a problem that writers never talk about where their money comes from?

Here’s my life. My husband and I get up each morning at 7 o’clock and he showers while I make coffee.

By the time he’s dressed I’m already sitting at my desk writing. He kisses me goodbye then leaves for the job where he makes good money, draws excellent benefits and gets many perks, such as travel, catered lunches and full reimbursement for the gym where I attend yoga midday.

His career has allowed me to work only sporadically, as a consultant, in a field I enjoy.

Why it’s a problem that writers never talk about where their money comes from

The truth is, my husband’s hefty salary makes my life as a writer easy. Pretending otherwise doesn’t help anyone

All that disclosure is crass because in this world where women will sit around discussing the various topiary shapes of their bikini waxes, the conversation about money (or privilege) is the one we never have. Why?

I think it’s the Marie Antoinette syndrome: Those with privilege and luck don’t want the riffraff knowing the details. After all, if “those people” understood the differences in our lives, they might revolt.

Or, God forbid, not see us as somehow more special, talented and/or deserving than them.

There’s a special version of this masquerade that we writers put on. Two examples:

I attended a packed reading (I’m talking 300+ people) about a year and a half ago. The author was very well-known, a magnificent nonfictionist who has, deservedly, won several big awards.

He also happens to be the heir to a mammoth fortune. Mega-millions. In other words he’s a man who has never had to work one job, much less two. He has several children; I know, because they were at the reading with him, all lined up. I heard someone say they were all traveling with him, plus two nannies, on his worldwide tour.

None of this takes away from his brilliance.

Yet, when an audience member — young, wide-eyed, clearly not clued in — rose to ask him how he’d managed to spend 10 years writing his current masterpiece — What had he done to sustain himself and his family during that time? — he told her in a serious tone that it had been tough but he’d written a number of magazine articles to get by.

I heard a titter pass through the half of the audience that knew the truth. But the author, impassive, moved on and left this woman thinking he’d supported his Manhattan life for a decade with a handful of pieces in the Nation and Salon.

Example two.

A reading in a different city, featuring a 30-ish woman whose debut novel had just appeared on the front page of the New York Times Book Review. I didn’t love the book (a coming-of-age story set among wealthy teenagers) but many people I respect thought it was great, so I defer.

The author had herself attended one of the big, East Coast prep schools, while her parents were busy growing their careers on the New York literary scene. These were people — her parents — who traded Christmas cards with William Maxwell and had the Styrons over for dinner. She, the author, was their only beloved child.

After prep school, she’d earned two creative writing degrees (Iowa plus an Ivy). Her first book was being heralded by editors and reviewers all over the country, many of whom had watched her grow up. It was a phenomenon even before it hit bookshelves. She was an immediate star.

When (again) an audience member, clearly an undergrad, rose to ask this glamorous writer to what she attributed her success, the woman paused, then said that she had worked very hard and she’d had some good training, but she thought in looking back it was her decision never to have children that had allowed her to become a true artist.

If you have kids, she explained to the group of desperate nubile writers, you have to choose between them and your writing. Keep it pure. Don’t let yourself be distracted by a baby’s cry.

I was dumbfounded.

I wanted to leap to my feet and shout. “Hello? Alice Munro! Doris Lessing! Joan Didion!” Of course, there are thousands of other extraordinary writers who managed to produce art despite motherhood. But the essential point was that, the quality of her book notwithstanding, this author’s chief advantage had nothing to do with her reproductive decisions. It was about connections. Straight up. She’d had them since birth.

In my opinion, we do an enormous “let them eat cake” disservice to our community when we obfuscate the circumstances that help us write, publish and in some way succeed.

I can’t claim the wealth of the first author (not even close); nor do I have the connections of the second. I don’t have their fame either. But I do have a huge advantage over the writer who is living paycheck to paycheck, or lonely and isolated, or dealing with a medical condition, or working a full-time job.

How can I be so sure? Because I used to be poor, overworked and overwhelmed.

And I produced zero books during that time.

Throughout my 20s, I was married to an addict who tried valiantly (but failed, over and over) to stay straight. We had three children, one with autism, and lived in poverty for a long, wretched time.

In my 30s I divorced the man because it was the only way out of constant crisis. For the next 10 years, I worked two jobs and raised my three kids alone, without child support or the involvement of their dad.

I published my first novel at 39, but only after a teaching stint where I met some influential writers and three months living with my parents while I completed the first draft.

After turning in that manuscript, I landed a pretty cushy magazine editor’s job. A year later, I met my second husband. For the first time I had a true partner, someone I could rely on who was there in every way for me and our kids.

Life got easier. I produced a nonfiction book, a second novel and about 30 essays within a relatively short time.

Today, I am essentially “sponsored” by this very loving man who shows up at the end of the day, asks me how the writing went, pours me a glass of wine, then takes me out to eat. He accompanies me when I travel 500 miles to do a 75-minute reading, manages my finances, and never complains that my dark, heady little books have resulted in low advances and rather modest sales.

I completed my third novel in eight months flat. I started the book while on a lovely vacation. Then I wrote happily and relatively quickly because I had the time and the funding, as well as help from my husband, my agent and a very talented editor friend.

Without all those advantages, I might be on page 52. OK, there’s mine. Now show me yours.

Ann Bauer is a frequent contributor to Salon and the author of a new novel, “Forgiveness 4 You.”

Folly of follies: Worshipping illusions

Mankind learned to fear and abhor death when he invented the notion of liquid currencies or money.

Mankind began to worship killing other humans when he realized that it generated quick money.

In no period of history worship was Not associated with killing one another, creating the notion of the sacrificial lamb, the collateral damages of the destitute, the downtrodden, the ignored, the unknown.

Worshipping is the pure definition of believing in a set of illusions and myths.

We believe in a God, a cultist system, the Nation, the Money, the Army, the Banks, artificial wealth not backed by readily exchangeable goods and services…

Mankind will keep worshipping any one of these fiction realities, even if half of mankind is slaughtered or trampled.

Only taking care of our daily tasks keeps us sane for the duration.

The folly of follies is when we indulge in maniacal routine daily tasks to avert the imminence of folly.

Task like constant dusting, frequent re-arranging furniture, cataloguing and ordering what we possess…

House-Money effect: Money is not neutral, it is not naked and it is colorful

Do you think money is money?

Are cash money, checks, traveler checks, stocks, bonds… equivalent?

Is the money you saved from hard work equivalent in value from what you find in the street?

Is money inherited similar in value from hard work?

Which kind of money you tend to spend quickly, swiftly and on unnecessary items?

Does the emotional shroud adds value to money?

Does money earned in a lottery ticket change your decisions when compared to hard earned money?

Which kinds of money gives you this urge to take a postponed long vacation? Or to improve your property?

Suppose you won $1,000 on a roulette game and then lost it. How great is your regret and suffering? I guess it won’t last long compared to hard earned saving.

Here is an experiment:

Two groups are randomly selected. Group A is given $30 in cash and then asked to bet: You win $9 if head or lose $9 if tail in a coin toss.

Group B is not offered any money. The subjects are told that they will receive $30 or take part in a coin tossing. The subject win $39 if head or $21 if tail.

Which group felt incited to gamble? 70% of Group A gambled compare to 43% in group B. Why?

The expected value is the same, but group A got readily in hand $30?

Marketing strategists expect to benefit from your sheer exuberance by rewarding you with upfront cash money if you apply to their programs (credit cards, airlines, phone companies…).

Eventually, you’ll quickly spend the money and accrue exorbitant interest rates on your credit card.

For the same expected value, which money you prefer: cash money, checks, traveler checks, stocks, bonds, inheritance, lottery…?

Does the term “added value” is of purely a monetary connotation?

 

 

Do you care to hear the story of the “Dollar Bill”?

Note: If you like to hear the story from the beginning https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2012/06/10/privately-owned-federal-reserve-bank-how-the-rothschild-family-controlled-the-printing-of-the-dollars/

First, the name “Federal Reserve Bank” is not federal, nor is it owned by the government. It is privately owned.

Its employees are not in the civil service. Its physical property is held under private deeds, and is subject to local taxation.

It is an engine that has created private wealth that is unimaginable, even to the most financially sophisticated.

It has enabled an imperial elite to manipulate US economy for its own agenda and enlisted the US government itself as its enforcer.

The US Federal Reserve Bank controls the times, dictates business, affects Americans’ homes and practically everything in which Americans are interested.

It takes a powerful force to maintain an empire, and this one is no different.

The concerns of the leadership of the “Federal Reserve” and its secretive international benefactors appear to go well beyond currency and interest rates.

Alan Greenspan, served as Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, stated at the annual Dinner of Francis Boyer Lecture of The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research on December 5, 1996:

“Augmenting concerns about the Federal Reserve is the perception that we are a secretive organization, operating behind closed doors, not always in the interests of the nation as a whole. This is regrettable, and we continuously strive to alter this misperception.”

The privately owned Federal Reserve has confused the public, lied to them and stole their gold and silver.

All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in the Constitution, and not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.

Of all the contrivances devised for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effective than that which deludes him with paper money.

After many years of blundering toward it, and only a few months before the beginning of the World War 1, Rothschild found the formula for the most efficient credit machine that was ever invented. This was the Federal Reserve System.

Most people are unsure of the meanings of words such as money, dollar, wealth, inflation and credit. The average person would be very surprised if they knew how the money system used to work compared to how it operates now.

The essence of psychological warfare is to confuse the meaning of words, and infiltrate the mind with conflicting concepts.

The use of the word Federal in the name federal Reserve leads the public to believe that the Federal Reserve is a government institution, when it is really a private corporation owned by foreign and domestic banks and operated for profit.

The Federal Reserve controls America’s money supply and interest rates, and there by manipulates the entire economy, in violation of

1. Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution that expressly charges Congress with power to coin money and regulate the value thereof, and.

2. Article 1, Section 10 of the constitution says “No State shall make any thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in payment of Debts.”

Over time, gold and silver coins were removed from American money supply and removed as backing for American paper currency and replaced with debt (or credit).

The definition of dollar has changed to hide the fact that a dollar is not money, but a unit of measurement for gold and silver coin. For example:

1. Title 12 United States Code Section 152 says: “The terms lawful money or lawful money of the United States shall be construed to mean gold or silver coin of the United States.”

2. Title 31 United States Code, Section 5101 says: “The money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars.”

The recent equivalent to the goldsmith’s receipt for gold is the Federal Reserve Note. The word “Federal” implies Federal government, but the Federal Reserve is a privately owned corporation. The word “Reserve” implies that something gives the paper receipt value, but no gold or silver backs this paper.

The word “Note” implies a contract, because legally a note must state who is paying, what is being paid, to whom and when.

Most people say something like, “I have a dollar bill”. But what is a bill?

A bill is a receipt of a debt owed by one person or company to another. Therefore, a “dollar bill” is a receipt (or bill) of debt of one dollar that is owed.

From 1914 to 1963, Federal Reserve Notes never claimed to be money, nor did they claim to be dollars. A note for five dollars read: “The United States of America will pay to the bearer on demand five dollars.”

How can a promise to pay five dollars be five dollars?

To the left of the President’s picture and above the bank seal, it said: “This note is legal tender for all debts public and private, and is redeemable in lawful money at the United States Treasury or at any Federal Reserve Bank.”

In 1963, the Federal Reserve began to issue its first series of notes without the promise, while taking notes with the promise out of circulation. How can paper become what it promises by removing the promise?

To the left of the President’s picture and above the bank seal, it now read: “This note is legal tender for all debts public and private.”

A note is a proof of debt. It is not possible to pay off a debt with a debt. No debt can be paid in full unless paid in gold or silver, coined and regulated in value by Congress. The name “Federal Reserve Note” is a fraudulent label since each word claims to be something that in reality it is not.

By removing the promise to redeem the note in lawful money, the Federal Government in cooperation with the Federal Reserve, eliminated the monetary system of the United States as established by the Constitution and replaced it with something totally different.

If you are holding a one dollar Federal Reserve Note, the question is: “what is one dollar?

The answer is absolutely nothing. The number measures no substance.

The only thing that give paper money value is the confidence people have in it as is stated in chapter 30 of our textbook.

Federal Reserve Notes are only accepted because people believe they have value.

Note 1: https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/how-the-dollar-faired-since-1913/

Note 2:  The article was from Nalliah Thayabharan in response to my post: https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2012/05/15/super-nationalist-zionism-contributed-to-the-rise-of-the-third-reich/

Color of your money; (Dec. 25, 2009)

Consider a settled community. Suppose that in the beginning each extended family has its own water source, its lot to grow food, its chicken, a goat or cow for milk. For a time, this extended family is sufficient; it might not occasionally eat its fill but it does not suffer of famine or existential danger. Due to calamities in weather, disease, or family problems then productivity for survival is at risk. The slack periods of labor, during winter season for example, has encouraged the extended family to becoming proficient in specific economic practices.

One group of families opts for artisanal productions (such as clothing, pottery, woodworking, metal tools, stonework…) and it trained a few of the members to that kind of non perishable products. Another group of families goes into raising cattle; a third group goes for agriculture of grain based or fruit products. Question: which group of families has potentially the upper hand economically within the community?  Maybe the cattle raisers can existentially survive better and exchange or barter better their products with other kinds of merchandizes. Most probably, goat, cows, or sheep might become the basic common “currency” for exchanges during community market days, events, marriages, and daily routines. The cattle families grow richer in worth especially that they are producing existential needs.

Calamities strike the community and raising cattle is no longer profitable. Suppose that artisans supplant other extended families in economical exchanges and cloth, tools for productions, or other artworks become the basic currency for bartering. It stands to reason that an artisanal product cannot be counterfeited easily because it requires years of training. Communities aid families in time of distress for a short time but customs require that help be returned, for example in labor work.

Life is not that predictable; after trying dominance of one group of families over other extended families then alliances emerge among families. A chief is selected from the allied families; the chief main worry is to establishing stability and good working relationships in the community. A trading and unifying “currency”, agreeable to the alliance, is accepted by the community. Most probably major warehouses for various products are instituted by the chief and his powerful alliance of families. The chiefs learn to consider a currency that is more effective and easier to handle than actual bartering. Soon, metal coins are manufactured: they are not easily counterfeited because they require skills and much training. By the by, rare metals are considered and monopoly for the rare metals is concentrated in the hand of the chief’s entourage. Gradually, political systems learn that a currency has to enjoy properties such as being small to handle, having intrinsic value, rare, and difficult to counterfeit. Families not designated to manufacture the currencies will have to invest large capitals for acquiring the raw material and the skills. Police force is established to guard the warehouses and to apprehend counterfeiters and then hang them. The effigy of the chief is stamped on the coins.

A new class of families emerges (the bankers) that specifically manufacture the coins and distribute them to “oil” the economy.      Conflicts of economic supremacy among groups of “professionals” are frequent and these conflicts turn political by mechanism of alliance of interests. When the political system changes, then the rules of the game change by exercising “preferential” treatments to the alliance. The victor will inherit the warehouses and a new currency is coined to the advantage of the alliance. Other community chiefs might counterfeit the “enemy’s” currency with lower quantity of gold or silver for profit and for discrediting the enemy chief. In general, pride along with the dissemination of perception that the enemy is expanding economically on territory forces the counterfeiting chief to “recall” the counterfeited currency.

The colonies in the US before independence experienced economic expansions while England was having hard times. Benjamin Franklin, Ambassador to France after the US independence, let out the secret: Economic expansion was related to the colonies enjoying the right to “printing” currency when the economy needed this “oiling” mechanism. England then convinced the U, after its independence, to have the monopoly of issuing money; the Rothschild family endeavored to ruin the US economic expansion by refraining from distributing needed currencies. The dollar received a higher value than being simply an oiling mechanism: the dollar was overvalued and the economy shrank. After the civil war of secession two powers got in conflict: the bullion gold group and the “Green buck” who rightly considered the bullion currency as undemocratic and favoring the northern States who horded most of the gold.

This concept of money as simply lubricating mechanism continued to be adopted by economists since Adam Smith: economists set the money aside as an economic factor of interest and analyzed the economy as a barter exchange of good that was no longer valid.  Money is an entire social fact; it is a language and an institution (a set of rules, regulations guaranteed by political power that should be accepted as legitimate); money reflects the tag of war among classes in times of financial crisis: money has not the same value and meaning for the poor and the rich. The rich classes have the connections and political cloud to efficiently utilize and fructify their worth in money. Money is indeed unequally distributed and has become a cultural capital that divides communities.

What happens when a currency with intrinsic value is substituted with paper money or banknotes? What kind of confidence the community members enjoy to resume exchanging good products with just papers or fiduciary banknotes?  What happens when citizens are forbidden to exchange this fiduciary paper with gold put in reserves to guarantee their worth?

Question: “how this currency is guaranteed to be accepted by the entire community for smooth exchange of merchandizes?” There are three levels of confidence required for times of financial crisis. First with have the “methodical confidence”; a check worth $100 from one national bank should be exchanged with $100 at another national bank; the institution of “independent” National Banks guarantee this kind of confidence when one bank goes bankrupt. The second kind of confidence is “hierarchical confidence”. In times of financial crisis there are hierarchical structures to quick “arbitration mechanisms” among financial institutions based on rules, laws, and regulations. The third kind of confidence is the “ethical confidence”. The political power in charge of supervising money distribution makes decisions that are never neutral economically and socially. If legitimacy of the authority is lacking due to ethnic or religious conflicts with a State, then ethical confidence is perturbed. It is the conformity to a system of values that is the last barrier against monetary crisis. This is what happened in Argentina, especially when Argentina tied its currency to the overvalued US dollar and thus Argentina lost its independence of issuing money relative to the internal trading expansion.

It is inevitable that globalization will institute two kinds of currencies; one currency meant for the little people and “derivatives” for the big players. The traditional monetary system for the little people will adopt an international banknote based on a basket of rare metals, critical industrial raw material metals, and other existential products. This currency would actually function as a redistribution mechanism of accumulated currency reserves from States to other needy States in currency. The little people currency would be transferred as fiscal exchange among federated states.

The “derivative” currency (future, forward, and option) will be established after international institutions guarantee the three kinds of confidence for derivative exchanges and stop being a competition among enemies.

Slow down your investment money: Stupid; (Oct. 28, 2009)

Sir, learn to slow down your investment money: it is man who generates money. Finance and business are too important to be left to the exclusive experts in finance and doing business as usual contended the British economist Schumacher in his classic book “Small is beautiful”; he expressed the necessity for mankind to rediscover a set of values of higher exigencies than just economy.

In liberal capitalism money came to be viewed as an abstract entity that was represented by derivative products that have no practical meanings even to the experts in finance. Thus, the world was glutted with 50 trillion dollars in paper derivatives that were badly managed and controlled simply because this wealth was fundamentally fictitious until the Big Crash; then fiction translated into miseries.

Since 1920’s, money was perceived as an instrument to gain more money or “money generates money” rapidly and easily. Investors had no idea who is manipulating their money or how: they reached the threshold that investors didn’t care who is managing their money or making it fructify as long as fictitious bank statements told them that their bank account has swollen a bit more. This fictitious wealth didn’t represent accurately real activities around the world of economies.

The same process of abstraction was applied to agro-economy. The founder of Slow Food, Carlo Petrini, wrote: “If you use your money as chemical fertilizers then your quick product grows artificially; the land will require more chemical fertilizers the next year for reduced quantity.  This is not a durable method for fructifying your investment or for saving your land of depletion and of quick death.  Now, if you use your money as natural fertilizer by slowing down the output for a durable and natural recycling of the land and organic product then there is chance for a durable economy based on wholesome and lasting sustainable process for healthy products.”

Sir, if you still have money to invest then look around the businesses in your community.  You need to do your due diligence to get acquainted with the employees and personnel.  You need to know that the products are wholesome and sustainable; that the owners and managers of the business know their business, the products, and the needs of the community. You have to make sure that your community is patronizing the products and that the workers are enjoying their jobs, supportive of the products, and working in a healthy and safe working environment.

Sir, learn to slow down your investment money: it is man who generate money.  You need to become an activist for the welfare of your community.  Pressure the government and financial institutions into aiding your local businesses and local banks that serve the community.  Pressure the your law makers to enact laws that prohibit local banks into lending money to “fictitious” non-local institutions that you have no idea or control over their transactions.

Sir, pressure your local banks to include social experts and community activists to the board of directors and in positions to control the transactions to make sure that another trend of “fictitious money” is not spiraling and taking a life of its own.

Sir, make sure that all these control and management tools are firmly established and then you may claim that “the market will be able to stabilize seasonal or emerging fluctuations”, that you may enjoy a sound and wholesome economy that caters to the need and survival of the community well being.

Woody Tasch in his book “Inquiries into the nature of slow money” criss-crossed the country for six months and noticed strong latent demands for alternative solutions; he wrote “people comprehend that for food to have tangible values then agriculture must be diversified and offer advantages to the environment, health, job creation, and community security.” Tasch has started Slow Money Alliance, a series of lending institutions composed of people in agricultures, in agro-business, donators and investors for soil restoration and products grown naturally. Tasch is encouraging philanthropic institutions with an estimated 500 billions invested in stocks to re-invest into 503 (c) 3i (the i is for integral economy) where the money is not intended for profit and not taxed by the Federal government. Philanthropic money need to be re-invested into social fairness in health, safety, and equity.

Slow Money Alliance is applying the new economical paradigm by investing in small agricultural and food enterprises so that thousands can recover jobs in already existing family lands, biological products, and the restaurants of Slow Food.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

September 2020
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Blog Stats

  • 1,418,666 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 770 other followers

%d bloggers like this: