NT Functional requirements for Monetary Sovereignty

The current monetary system is in systemic failure.

It is a monoculture(97%) money created with debt with positive interest private corporations.

Monocultures are very fragile systems and must crash over time

My corncerns about the monetary system are those summarised in Money and Sustainability;

The Missing Link: Club of Rome Report.  >>> I excerpt the 5 items NT refers to below:

1. Banking loan practice amplifies boom and bust cycles:
2. Discounted cash flow practice in investment leads to short-term thinking
3. Compound interest imposes compulsory growth in a finite world
4. Positive interest rates concentrate wealth at the top and impoverish more people. This threatens democracy with more support for anti-democratic parties, as occurred in recent European elections.
5. Current measurements show social capital is being eroded, particularly in industrialised countries. Recent scientific studies show that money tends to promotes selfish and non-collaborative behaviour.

Th e Eff ects of Today’s Money System on Sustainability

Amplifi cation of boom and bust cycles:

>>> System stability

Short-term thinking:

Compulsory growth: The process of compound interest or interest on interest

imposes exponential growth on the economy. Yet exponential growth is, by

definition, unsustainable in a finite world.

>>>possible debt bubble concern, maybe in the concern expressed by Keen- of an unsustainable financial spiral

Concentration of wealth: The middle class is disappearing worldwide, with

most of the wealth flowing to the top and increasing rates of poverty at the

bottom. Such inequalities generate a broad range of social problems and are

also detrimental to economic growth. Beyond the economic issue, the very

survival of democracy may be at stake.

>>> Gini coefficient mandate for RBNZ?- that RBNZ collect inequality statistics, and that it have a mandate to reduce inequality- so that net wealth of the top decile is within what percentage of the lowest decile?

Devaluation of social capital: Social capital which is built on mutual trust

>> An excellent line of discussion along the lines of Douglas's Social Credit idea.  Is that where you are on that, or is it different in some respects?

and results in collaborative action has always been difficult to measure.

Nevertheless, whenever measurements have been made, they reveal a

tendency for social capital to be eroded, particularly in industrialised

countries. Recent scientific studies show that money tends to promote selfish

and non-collaborative behaviours. These behaviours are not compatible with

long-term sustainability.

Far from being a behaviourally neutral and passive medium of exchange, as

generally assumed, conventional money deeply shapes a range of behaviour patterns,

of which the five listed above are incompatible with sustainability

>> There is an emerging area of behavioral economics analysis- used by both orthodox and heterodox economists.  The greens have advocated for broader range of views among RBNZ economic analysts.  My presumption is that you would favour a requirement specifying the behavioral economic analysis but not from the orthodox perspective- instead one that looks at the broader social context like ecological sustainability.

The nature of my interest in the monetary sovereignty work group.

There is a great need for a robust discussion on what sort of monetary system is appropriate today.

If the Green Party is to be relevant it must have a prepared stance that isn’t more of the same.

>>>GP monetary policy needs to be obviously different in kind from those of other parties.

SM is only the begining but an essential ingredient of a modern monetary system. It is highly centralised and Northland (and regional NZ) know about the limitations of non local solutions.

>> local banking / development funding requirement.

I’m not a wordsmith so feel free to fashion requirements out of that lot.

My consensus type experience has led me to know that I need not put forward

topics/view points that are already covered.

I’ve been taking part in SM type discussions since the 1960’s so I really appreciate

your work for the group.